During the sixties, controversy arose concerning the benefits of industrial property protection in developing countries.
As far back as 1961, Brazil questioned the role of patents in developing countries at the General Assembly of the United Nations. As a consequence, an excellent study was published on this subject by the United Nations in 1964.
A few years later, at UNCTAD, Mexico and Brazil proposed a Code of Ethics for technology transfers, designed to facilitate the access of developing countries to technologies available in industrialised countries.
Confrontation continued during the seventies, during the negotiations to revise the contents of the Paris Convention, when the developing countries, led by Brazil and India, tried to introduce the concept of “exclusive compulsory licences”.
This concept was obviously unacceptable to the industrialised countries and became one of the obstacles to a successful conclusion of the revision of the Paris Convention.
From the mid-eighties to the middle of the nineties, TRIPS became the subject of intensive discussions. After overcoming substantial opposition, TRIPS was finally accepted and approved in exchange for promises of agricultural concessions for developing countries. These promises have not yet been fulfilled.
By joining the newly established WTO – World Trade Organisation – all member countries, including developing and third world countries, had to adapt their intellectual property legislation to the TRIPS provisions. Many took the occasion to also improve their intellectual property offices.
While industrialised countries rightfully continued to promote intellectual property protection as an essential element for general development, emerging countries started to make more extensive use of industrial property protection, mainly China and Korea. India and Brazil, in spite of internal controversies, have also moved towards promoting innovation, increasing use of the patent system, protecting well known marks and fighting against piracy. On the other hand, and especially in third world countries, a certain disillusionment has taken hold.
Despite having improved their laws and, in many cases, having restructured their intellectual property offices, developing and third world countries lack national users of intellectual property protection and now look for assistance in solving this problem.
WIPO is presently debating the “Agenda for Development” presented by Brazil and Argentina, which does not meet the needs of the third world countries. Access to technology and technical assistance are once more proposed in very broad terms, which are not very different from similar proposals in the sixties and seventies. The proposal is a complex one and many hours have been lost in discussing procedural details.
The ICC – International Chamber of Commerce – a worldwide organisation embodying businesses from various countries of different levels of development, organised a very successful session last June, directed to both developing and third world countries, with the participation of entities from Argentina, Brazil, Egypt and India, as well as NGOs dedicated to helping third world countries achieve progress through innovation. All of them reported the successful use of industrial property protection by their companies and organisations. During the discussions which followed, it became clear that third world countries above all needed much more educational assistance, before reaching for technical assistance or technology. Among the questions raised, one expressed an evidently general concern on how to encourage more innovation and increase the use of the patent system.
Concluding, it became evident that developing and third world countries need practical action if they are to become part of the intellectual property world. Business can help. Business is obviously interested in development. More development means more business. The usefulness of industrial property protection can be learned from business and business should be interested in making this known.
