Titulo:

Is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
.

Sumario:

In view of a wide use of alternative plant variety protection systems in Asia, in this paper I critically analyse whether the UPOV system is the only effective sui generis protection that is compatible with Article 27(3)(b) of TRIPS. This article provides an overview of the UPOV Convention and Article 27(3)(b), and critically analyses whether, nowadays, the 1991 Act of the upov Convention is the only effective sui generis protection of plant varieties.

Guardado en:

1657-1959

2346-2116

2014-11-05

119

129

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2

id metarevistapublica_uexternado_revistalapropiedadinmaterial_42_article_3909
record_format ojs
spelling Is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
Is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
In view of a wide use of alternative plant variety protection systems in Asia, in this paper I critically analyse whether the UPOV system is the only effective sui generis protection that is compatible with Article 27(3)(b) of TRIPS. This article provides an overview of the UPOV Convention and Article 27(3)(b), and critically analyses whether, nowadays, the 1991 Act of the upov Convention is the only effective sui generis protection of plant varieties.
Cruz Saldivar, Erwin
Article 27(3)(b) TRIPS
UPOV
plant varieties
alternative plant variety protection systems
sui generis rights breeders system.
18
Artículo de revista
Journal article
2014-11-05T00:00:00Z
2014-11-05T00:00:00Z
2014-11-05
application/pdf
text/html
Centro de Estudios de la Propiedad Intelectual
Revista La Propiedad Inmaterial
1657-1959
2346-2116
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/view/3909
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/view/3909
spa
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
119
129
Primary sources
Case law
Novartis/Transgenic Plant [1999] epor 123.
Novartis/Transgenic Plant [2000] epor 303.
Legislation
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Annex 1C of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Marrakesh, Morocco, 15 April 1994.
Convention on Biological Diversity, Nairobi, 1992.
Council Regulation (2100/94) on Community plant variety rights [1994] O. J. L 227.
Directive (98/44/EC) on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions [1998] O.J. L 213.
International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Rome 3 November 2001.
The 1961 Act of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants.
The 1978 Act of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants.
The 1991 Act of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. UPOV Council, ‘Guidance for the preparation of laws based on the 1991 Act of the UPOV Convention’ UPOV/INF/6/3, 24 October 2013.
Secondary sources
Books
Drahos, and R. Mayne (ed), Global Intellectual Property Rights: Knowledge, Access and Development (Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, 2002).
Llewelyn, M. & M. Adcock, European Plant Intellectual Property (Oxford, Hart, 2006).
Wipo, Introduction to intellectual property: theory and practice (Kluwer Law International, London, 1997).
Journal articles and reports
Blakeney, M., ‘Access to Genetic Resources, Gene-based Inventions and Agriculture’ Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Study Paper 3b (2002).
Brahmi, P. and V. Chaudhary, ‘Protection of plant varieties: systems across countries’ (2011) 9 (3) Plant Genetic Resources, pp. 392-403.
Cullet, P., ‘Monsanto v. Schmeiser: A Landmark Decision concerning Farmer Liability and Transgenic Contamination’ (2005) 17(1) Journal of Environmental Law, pp. 83-108.
Downes, G., ‘TRIPS and food security: Implications of the WTO’s TRIPS Agreement for food security in the developing world’ (2004) 106 (5) bfj, pp. 366-379.
Lertdhamtewe, P., ‘Asian approaches to international law: focusing on plant protection issues’ (2013) 8 (5) Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, pp. 388-398.
Lertdhamtewe, P., ‘Plant variety protection in Thailand: The need for a new coherent framework’ (2013) 8 (1) Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, pp. 33-42.
Llewelyn, M., ‘From gatt to gatt: Intellectual Property Rights & Genetics Fifty Years After Crick & Watson Part I’ (2003/4) 6 (3) Bio/Science Law Review, pp 107-117.
Llewelyn, M., ‘From gatt to gatt: Intellectual Property Rights & Genetics Fifty Years After Crick & Watson, Part II’ (2003/4) 6 (4) Bio/Science Law Review, pp. 142-162.
Plahe, J.K., ‘TRIPS Downhill: India’s Plant Variety Protection System and Implications for Small Farmers’ (2011) 41 (1) Journal of Contemporary Asia, pp. 75-98.
Rangnekar, D., ‘Geneva Rhetoric, National Reality: The Political Economy of Introducing Plant Breeders’ Rights in Kenya’ (2014) 19 (3) New Political Economy, pp. 359-383.
Raustiala, K. and D.G. Victor, ‘The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources’ (2004) 58 (2) International Organization, pp. 277-309.
Robinson, D., ‘Sui Generis plant variety protection systems: liability rules and non-UPOV systems of protection’ (2008) 3 (10) Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, pp. 659-665.
TRIPS Council, ‘Communication from the European Communities and their member States’ Review of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement, and the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity (cbd) and the protection of traditional knowledge and folklore, A Concept Paper. IP/C/W/383, 17 October 2002.
TRIPS Council, ‘Review of the Provisions of Article 27.3(B): Summary of Issues Raised and Points Made’ IP/C/W/369/Rev.1, 9 March 2006.
UPOV Council, ‘Examination of the conformity of the Draft ARIPO Protocol for the protection of new varieties of plants with the 1991 Act of the UPOV Convention’, 31 Extraordinary Session, Geneva, April 11, 2014. C(Extr.)/31/2.
Zerbe, N., ‘Biodiversity, ownership, and indigenous knowledge: Exploring legal frameworks for community, farmers, and intellectual property rights in Africa’ (2005) 53 Ecological Economics, pp. 493-506.
Other relevant resources
UPOV, Members of the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, Status on June 10, 2014. [http://www.UPOV.int/export/sites/UPOV/members/en/pdf/pub423.pdf] (accessed 18 June 2014).
WTO, TRIPS: Issues, Article 27.3b, traditional knowledge, biodiversity. [http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/TRIPS_e/art27_3b_e.htm] (accessed 20 June 2014).
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/download/3909/4203
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/download/3909/4345
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ARTREF
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
Text
Publication
institution UNIVERSIDAD EXTERNADO DE COLOMBIA
thumbnail https://nuevo.metarevistas.org/UNIVERSIDADEXTERNADODECOLOMBIA/logo.png
country_str Colombia
collection Revista La Propiedad Inmaterial
title Is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
spellingShingle Is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
Cruz Saldivar, Erwin
Article 27(3)(b) TRIPS
UPOV
plant varieties
alternative plant variety protection systems
sui generis rights breeders system.
title_short Is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
title_full Is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
title_fullStr Is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
title_full_unstemmed Is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
title_sort is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
title_eng Is there only one effective sui generis protection that meets the obligation set out in article 27(3)(b) of trips?
description In view of a wide use of alternative plant variety protection systems in Asia, in this paper I critically analyse whether the UPOV system is the only effective sui generis protection that is compatible with Article 27(3)(b) of TRIPS. This article provides an overview of the UPOV Convention and Article 27(3)(b), and critically analyses whether, nowadays, the 1991 Act of the upov Convention is the only effective sui generis protection of plant varieties.
author Cruz Saldivar, Erwin
author_facet Cruz Saldivar, Erwin
topicspa_str_mv Article 27(3)(b) TRIPS
UPOV
plant varieties
alternative plant variety protection systems
sui generis rights breeders system.
topic Article 27(3)(b) TRIPS
UPOV
plant varieties
alternative plant variety protection systems
sui generis rights breeders system.
topic_facet Article 27(3)(b) TRIPS
UPOV
plant varieties
alternative plant variety protection systems
sui generis rights breeders system.
citationissue 18
publisher Centro de Estudios de la Propiedad Intelectual
ispartofjournal Revista La Propiedad Inmaterial
source https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/view/3909
language spa
format Article
rights https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
references Primary sources
Case law
Novartis/Transgenic Plant [1999] epor 123.
Novartis/Transgenic Plant [2000] epor 303.
Legislation
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Annex 1C of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Marrakesh, Morocco, 15 April 1994.
Convention on Biological Diversity, Nairobi, 1992.
Council Regulation (2100/94) on Community plant variety rights [1994] O. J. L 227.
Directive (98/44/EC) on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions [1998] O.J. L 213.
International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Rome 3 November 2001.
The 1961 Act of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants.
The 1978 Act of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants.
The 1991 Act of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. UPOV Council, ‘Guidance for the preparation of laws based on the 1991 Act of the UPOV Convention’ UPOV/INF/6/3, 24 October 2013.
Secondary sources
Books
Drahos, and R. Mayne (ed), Global Intellectual Property Rights: Knowledge, Access and Development (Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, 2002).
Llewelyn, M. & M. Adcock, European Plant Intellectual Property (Oxford, Hart, 2006).
Wipo, Introduction to intellectual property: theory and practice (Kluwer Law International, London, 1997).
Journal articles and reports
Blakeney, M., ‘Access to Genetic Resources, Gene-based Inventions and Agriculture’ Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Study Paper 3b (2002).
Brahmi, P. and V. Chaudhary, ‘Protection of plant varieties: systems across countries’ (2011) 9 (3) Plant Genetic Resources, pp. 392-403.
Cullet, P., ‘Monsanto v. Schmeiser: A Landmark Decision concerning Farmer Liability and Transgenic Contamination’ (2005) 17(1) Journal of Environmental Law, pp. 83-108.
Downes, G., ‘TRIPS and food security: Implications of the WTO’s TRIPS Agreement for food security in the developing world’ (2004) 106 (5) bfj, pp. 366-379.
Lertdhamtewe, P., ‘Asian approaches to international law: focusing on plant protection issues’ (2013) 8 (5) Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, pp. 388-398.
Lertdhamtewe, P., ‘Plant variety protection in Thailand: The need for a new coherent framework’ (2013) 8 (1) Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, pp. 33-42.
Llewelyn, M., ‘From gatt to gatt: Intellectual Property Rights & Genetics Fifty Years After Crick & Watson Part I’ (2003/4) 6 (3) Bio/Science Law Review, pp 107-117.
Llewelyn, M., ‘From gatt to gatt: Intellectual Property Rights & Genetics Fifty Years After Crick & Watson, Part II’ (2003/4) 6 (4) Bio/Science Law Review, pp. 142-162.
Plahe, J.K., ‘TRIPS Downhill: India’s Plant Variety Protection System and Implications for Small Farmers’ (2011) 41 (1) Journal of Contemporary Asia, pp. 75-98.
Rangnekar, D., ‘Geneva Rhetoric, National Reality: The Political Economy of Introducing Plant Breeders’ Rights in Kenya’ (2014) 19 (3) New Political Economy, pp. 359-383.
Raustiala, K. and D.G. Victor, ‘The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources’ (2004) 58 (2) International Organization, pp. 277-309.
Robinson, D., ‘Sui Generis plant variety protection systems: liability rules and non-UPOV systems of protection’ (2008) 3 (10) Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, pp. 659-665.
TRIPS Council, ‘Communication from the European Communities and their member States’ Review of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement, and the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity (cbd) and the protection of traditional knowledge and folklore, A Concept Paper. IP/C/W/383, 17 October 2002.
TRIPS Council, ‘Review of the Provisions of Article 27.3(B): Summary of Issues Raised and Points Made’ IP/C/W/369/Rev.1, 9 March 2006.
UPOV Council, ‘Examination of the conformity of the Draft ARIPO Protocol for the protection of new varieties of plants with the 1991 Act of the UPOV Convention’, 31 Extraordinary Session, Geneva, April 11, 2014. C(Extr.)/31/2.
Zerbe, N., ‘Biodiversity, ownership, and indigenous knowledge: Exploring legal frameworks for community, farmers, and intellectual property rights in Africa’ (2005) 53 Ecological Economics, pp. 493-506.
Other relevant resources
UPOV, Members of the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, Status on June 10, 2014. [http://www.UPOV.int/export/sites/UPOV/members/en/pdf/pub423.pdf] (accessed 18 June 2014).
WTO, TRIPS: Issues, Article 27.3b, traditional knowledge, biodiversity. [http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/TRIPS_e/art27_3b_e.htm] (accessed 20 June 2014).
type_driver info:eu-repo/semantics/article
type_coar http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
type_version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
type_coarversion http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
type_content Text
publishDate 2014-11-05
date_accessioned 2014-11-05T00:00:00Z
date_available 2014-11-05T00:00:00Z
url https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/view/3909
url_doi https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/view/3909
issn 1657-1959
eissn 2346-2116
citationstartpage 119
citationendpage 129
url2_str_mv https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/download/3909/4203
url3_str_mv https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/propin/article/download/3909/4345
_version_ 1811199505685544960