Is the Open Texture of TRIPS Article 6 Neutral and Harmonious?
Why was Article 6 of the TRIPS Agreement designed to be an open texture provision? The article is certainly evidence of the failure of the Uruguay Round negotiations to transmute competing concepts into a coherent framework of rules. Some of the contracting parties to the GATT 1947 favoured parallel imports, advocating for the expansion of consumers welfare; at the same time, other contracting parties to the GATT advocated instead for the interests or welfare of producers. The Uruguay Round negotiations could not arrive at a convincing balance between these competing interests, and the result was a provision with an open texture. Longdin identifies the provision as embodying neutrality in WTO rule making, because it consists of a hands-off approach [14]. As the Uruguay Round Agreement did not line up on either side of the contentions – permission for or prohibition of parallel imports – perhaps it could be termed a neutral rules making approach . But in reality it is not neutral. The f
Related Questions
- The Center is international, independent and neutral, and is assisted in its operation by advisory bodies composed of external experts in international dispute resolution and intellectual property. Which dispute-resolution procedures does the Center offer?
- Newstext has eaten up my credit but I haven got the article - what now?
- Are Aventouras trips carbon neutral?
