论文部分内容阅读
澳大利亚颁布的烟草包装相关法案,引发乌克兰、洪都拉斯、多米尼加、古巴和印度尼西亚等国提起磋商,相关案件已进入专家组处理程序。梳理争端各方诉求,结合TRIPS协定相关条款分析争议焦点,澳方法案有关措施未对烟草商标构成歧视,符合TRIPS协定要求的对商标权人的权利保护规定,未对烟草商标的使用造成不正当妨碍。澳方措施引发的知识产权保护与公共健康治理冲突的根源在于TRIPS协定本身对两种利益保护的不平衡性。结合中国实际,在全球贸易自由化的浪潮中,中国应当积极参与贸易体制下知识产权保护和公共健康治理规则的制定,有效平衡知识产权与公共健康之间的冲突,构建起有效的利益平衡机制,以更好保护知识产权和维护公共健康。
The bills related to tobacco packaging promulgated by Australia have led to the consultations between Ukraine, Honduras, Dominica, Cuba and Indonesia, and the relevant cases have been brought into the expert group’s handling procedures. Combing the appeals of all parties involved in the dispute and analyzing the focus of the dispute in accordance with the relevant provisions of the TRIPS Agreement. The relevant measures of the Australian Act do not discriminate against tobacco trademarks and comply with the provisions on the protection of the rights of trademark holders required by the TRIPS Agreement, without causing any improper use of tobacco trademarks Hinder The root causes of conflict between intellectual property protection and public health governance triggered by the Australian side measure lie in the imbalance of the two interests protected by the TRIPS Agreement. Combining with China’s reality, in the tide of global trade liberalization, China should take an active part in the formulation of rules governing the protection of intellectual property rights and public health under the trade system, effectively balance the conflict between intellectual property and public health, and establish an effective balance of interests mechanism To better protect intellectual property and safeguard public health.