The paper "International Rules on Intellectual Property Rights " is a great example of a Macro and Microeconomics Case Study. The global countries balancing the trade-differences based on their protections in the intellectual property due to the conflict between economic interests and human health rights through public health proves to be challenging issue that might be tragic at some point. In this situation, to fully position the right to health in the existing laws within the intellectual property revolution, member states involved need to conduct studies and identify what basically entails the expected rights towards the individual health in a functioning society.
As such, international business rights adjudicate the involved countries towards balancing intellectual property rights while focusing on the management of public health. Contrarily, the societal regulations toward health are often sacrificed by the involved majority of member states towards favoring the economic interest. Globally, people and the majority of organizations presume that health is one of the greatest goods. As such, it leads to the structuring of the rights of health whereby it can easily be accessed through health care services offered in the country and the right for individuals to enjoy the positioned pre-conditions of health.
Arguably, the content being discussed involves the right to health that occurs through prioritization in the international intellectual property hence posing critical issues. The basic challenge is how the rights of health need to be incorporated either in TRIPs or different policies existing within TRIPs' rights. This can easily be justified by the international human rights institutions (WTO) failing in the provision of detailed information regarding the understanding of the right to health and its involved policies (Gurry, 2012). The paper tends to analyze and offer provisions through case studies by proposing the human rights approaches in the international intellectual property revolution that might help the member states in realizing the challenges between intellectual property law and health rights.
As such, the paper analyzes the tension and failure towards the rights to health and how the challenges might easily be curbed. Additionally, the paper analyzes the Trip's current scope of the right to health, the FTAs and the economy, environmental implications in the international trade, and the policy recommendations, all developed to refute the unjustified intellectual property protection that is against the rights of health. Analysis Tensions Regarding the ability to balance the trade-off between economic demands and the promotion of health rights prove to be challenging and chances of it failing are high.
The main aspects that contribute to such tensions include the level of justice issued, fairness while issuing health policies and equity in service delivery spearheaded by the diverse pressure of trade, basically among the vulnerable states and continent at large. As such, controversies that are on the ground at which both the developed and developing states focus on the global undertakings of the intense management of the public health.
Additionally, it can be easily argued that it is the approach towards decision-making and priority setting that foresees the right to health while the economic considerations are seen at the forefront. As such the individual rights to health are mostly sacrificed under the international intellectual property right while the greater effort is made towards countries' economic interests. Although some of the already developed countries have tried to be more illustrative of policy regarding the rights to health.
A good example is the U. S.A whereby its illustrative policy on HIV/AIDS positions the security of intellectual property rights arguing that medical company and institutions promise the innovations findings on medicines and cure hence a crucial driver to attain the standard level of public health (Ellen, 2012). Additionally, the TRIPS agreement is supportive of the approach indicating that intellectual property protection is a suitable method of future access to affordable health standards. However, based on the U. S.A illustrative policy and the applicability of the TRIPS agreement in the country towards the protection of the implemented intellectual property, chances are that the involved commitments towards patents management might arise at an expense of access to medical facilities for the less fortunate in society (Mishra, 2014).
Alwan, A. (2012) Global Status Report of World Health Organization on Non- Communicable Chronic Disease.
Bowie, N. (2013) M’sians Must Reject the U.S Trade Deals.
Correa, C. (2012) Implications of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health. The Health Economics and Drugs, EDM Series No. 12
Ellen, F. (2012) The Global of Politics of Pharmaceutical Monopoly Power. Drug Patents, Access, Innovation and the Application of the WTO Doha Declaration on TRIPs and Public Health. AMB Publishers, Diemen, Netherlands.
Froman, M. (2015) The 2015 National Trade Estimates Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. Office of the United States Trade Representatives.
Gurry, F. (2012) The Enforcement of the Intellectual Property Right. A Case Book, 3rd Edition. World Intellectual Property Organization.
Halajian, D. (2013) Inadequacy of TRIPS and the Compulsory License: Why Broad Compulsory License is not a Viable Solution to the Access of Health Rights. Brooklyn Journal of Law, Vol. No. 8, Issue. 3, Article. 7, p. 1192.
Mishra, L. (2014) Medicine and Marginalization: How Intellectual Property Laws Provides a Generic Solution to a Grave Human Rights Problem. International Human Rights Working Paper Series, Vol. 2, No. 6, p. 28.
Policy Brief. (2013) Access to Challenges for HIV treatment among People with HIV and Key Population in Middle –Income Countries
SEATINI AND CEHURD. (2013) Literature Review on Bottlenecks to Essential Medicine Production and Procurement in East and Southern Africa. Regional Network in Health in East and Southern Africa. Center for Trade Policy and Law EQUINET, Paper No. 6
The IP Commission Report. (2013) The Report of the Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property. The National Bureau of Asian Research, U.S.A.
Turk, M. (2013) Bargaining the Intellectual Property Treaties: The Case for a Pro-Development Interpretation of TRIPS but not TRIPS PLUS. Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 42, No. 98, p. 983.