Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (Annex 1C to the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization of 15 April 1994); See gattt secretariat, results of the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations, Legal Texts 365 et seq. (1994), www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/legal_e.htm#wtoagreement (accessed 25 November 2003). 1. Members shall be responsible for applying the provisions of this Convention. Members may, but are not obliged, to implement in their law a broader protection than that provided for in this Agreement, provided that such protection is not contrary to the provisions of this Agreement. Members are free to define the appropriate method for applying the provisions of this Convention in their own legal and practical order. (d) arising from international agreements for the protection of intellectual property which entered into force before the entry into force of the WTO Agreement, provided that such agreements are notified to the Ad Hoc Council and do not constitute arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination against nationals of other Members. Unlike other intellectual property agreements, TRIPS has an effective enforcement mechanism. States can be disciplined by the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. Functions: • Management of WTO trade agreements • Trade Negotiations Forum • Handling of trade disputes • Monitoring of national trade policies • Technical assistance and training to developing countries • Cooperation with other international organizations 3. Members shall accord to nationals of other Members the treatment provided for in this Agreement.
1. With regard to the intellectual property right concerned, nationals of other members are natural or legal persons who would meet the criteria for the use of the Paris Convention (1967), the Berne Convention (1971), the Rome Convention and the Treaty on Intellectual Property in the Field of Integrated Circuits. all WTO members were members of these agreements. 2. Any Member which makes use of the possibilities offered by Article 5(3) or Article 6(2) of the Rome Convention shall notify the Council for the Commercial Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) thereof in accordance with those provisions. This is probably due to the lack of legal and technical expertise needed to develop legislation to implement flexibility, which has often led developing countries to directly copy IP legislation by industrialized countries or to rely on technical assistance from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), which, according to critics like Cory Doctorov, encourages them to: implement stronger monopolies in intellectual property. In addition to the basic intellectual property standards established by the TRIPS Agreement, many nations have engaged in bilateral agreements to introduce a higher level of protection. This collection of standards, known as TRIPS+ or TRIPS-Plus, can take many forms.  The general objectives of these agreements are as follows: the obligations referred to in Articles 3 and 4 do not apply to the procedures provided for in multilateral agreements concluded under the aegis of WIPO concerning the acquisition or maintenance of intellectual property rights.
The 2002 Doha Declaration reaffirmed that the TRIPS Agreement should not prevent members from taking the necessary measures to protect public health. Despite this recognition, less developed countries have argued that flexible TRIPS provisions, such as compulsory licensing, are almost impossible to exercise. . . .