The Enforcement of IPRs in Jordan

The Enforcement of IPRs in Jordan

Overview of the Enforcement of IPRs in Jordan

During the Uruguay Round motion about the provision of a common platform in which the WTO member could use to enforce the IPR of domestic firms, the TRIPS agreement was incorporated into the WTO set of protocols. Legislative reforms were carried out by the WTO members with an objective of laying out rules and regulations that comply with the International standards outlined in the TRIPS[1]. In cases where the new firms from the members, oppose the IPR protection standards that are offered to them, the situation is solved through the Dispute Settlement Understanding scheme by the offending firm and the new firm that is against.

The Dispute Settlement Understanding gives an opportunity for the two parties to develop across agreement where the offending country can be subject to retribution trade validations that fall in another agreement by WTO which is mainly the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)[2].Incorporation of TRIPS into the WTO has paved a significant path from the development of standard trade which was something of no concern, in the past years. TRIPS agreement defines the various roles that the member countries need to undertake the way they need to utilize their local boundaries to protect the IPR.

The other two agreements in the WTO give a clean, reliable legal environment that allows universal trade and aim at minimizing the trade barriers in the member countries. The introduction of TRIPS into the WTO was substantially supported by the developing countries which were much pressured by the developed countries. The inclusion of TRIPS opened a reliable channel for the direct access to markets in the developed countries where they can market their agricultural and manufactured products[3].

According to the developed countries, intellectual property was a crucial part of their future trade systems and opposes the IPR levels that existed in their trading partners’ markets. The WTO perception by the innovating firms in these developed countries remains contentious and is seen as the migration of the WTO from an international trade marketer to an agent of majesty collection. TRIPS is of disadvantage at some point because it operates against the WTO agreements by bringing in laws that do not contribute to the global market welfare[4].

There has been a significant impact on global trade about the neoclassical theory of deal because of the profits obtained by the organization from the business. Nevertheless, the cost of protection that has been incurred in the process seems to be constant or goes up with the expansion of the geographical coverage which consequently leads to a marginal IPR protection benefit decrease[5]. To obtain maximum profits, therefore, there is need to have a moderated IPR protection geographic coverage above the level which the global benefits reduce. The disagreement that is posed by this idea is that some member countries should be excused from TRIPS agreement if its main aim is to increase the global welfare.

The TRIPS agreement works in efforts to establish and maintain unity for the IPR regulations among all its member nations. This paper is based on the objective of investigating whether TRIPS has accomplished its goals and what has been its impacts on IPRs protection in Jordan. If the effects it has on the IPR protection and other sectors in Jordan are positive, then the research will have given adequate proof that TRIPS has met its objectives[6]. If its effects cannot be seen to promote welfare, and then the effectiveness of this agreement remains questionable.

Enforcement of IPRs in Jordan

In efforts to improve the intellectual property rights, copyrights, and trademarks, Jordan implemented some laws before joining the World Trade Organizations. TRIPS laws seek for the protection of trade secrets, various plants and counter designs whereby there must be registration of copyrights, trademarks, and patents. In this case, copyrights are required to be recorded with the National library, patients with the registrar of patents and trademarks operating at the industrial ministry supply and trade. Jordan revised its patent and trademark laws in 2007 with the aim of enabling it to access the Madrid treaty concerning patent cooperation and trademarks registration.

By signing the FTA, the enforcement of IPR in Jordan was strengthened, especially in the pharmaceutical sector which entirely operates according to the new TRIPS steady patent law. Jordan has been ranked as the 47th among the 144 countries that are regarding good performance in intellectual property rights in the Middle East North Africa, according to the world report of information technology. The department of custom and public security in Jordan have established units in IPR to implement violations[7]. The Jordan Standards and Metrology Organization have defined laws that have contributed in snatching the fake products entering the market in Jordan based on its authority to safeguard the consumers from illegal products. Occasionally, the government carries out diligent streaks in examining better ways of improving protection of IPR, with the inclusion of a stricter implementation of the existing rules as well as the establishment of a stable IP organization.

In ensuring effective management of intellectual property in Jordan, it is imperative to employ several principles[8]. The first strategy is to lay out a definite policy to protect your intellectual property and the second is that the system used in IP protection in Jordan is different from that of U.S. Another principle is that it is mandatory for the rights to be recorded and registered in Jordan concerning the domestic laws. In this case, one is not protected by the Jordan IPR just because you have the U.S trademarks and copyrights registrations because it is against the country’s laws.

Nevertheless, some states have implemented the offering of protection of copyright for foreign workers which has now been made simpler by world copyright customs and contracts. Issuance of patents and trademarks is based on the first come first served strategy where the first filed trademarks or patents are invented first. It is therefore recommended that one considers registering their mark or copyright before commencing on any trade in the Jordan market.

Firms need to understand the intellectual property is a fundamental privacy right, and therefore the United States governments cannot manage to enforce rights for individuals in Jordan. Rights’ holders own the responsibility of registering, safeguarding and fighting for their rights where necessary[9]. However, companies may decide to look for advice from IP consultants, with a good understanding of the law of Jordan as well as the local attorneys. Despite the governments’ efforts to safeguard the IPR, it is impossible to make the process used if the right holders do not take the responsibility of preserving and implementing the Intellectual property rights on time.

In most countries, right holders who delay in enforcing their rights find themselves in a situation where their rights have been bleached due to reasons such as delays in the prosecution of proceedings[10]. It is advisable for both small and medium-size firms to have a comprehensive understanding of the benefits of partnerships with trade organizations and other associations which seek to protect the Intellectual property and do away with counterfeit goods.

 

The Jordan United States Free Trade Agreement (JUSFTA)

The Jordan United States Free Trade Agreement started operating in the year 2001 on 17th December and works towards progressive minimization of duties and doing away with the obstacles that hinder trade between Jordan and the U.S for the past ten years. JUSTFA provides a conducive environment for productive and profitable business practices through protection of intellectual property rights as well as the incorporation of labor and business-related practices. The US FTA in Jordan bases its operations on a set of flexible rules that allow Jordan to gradually experience developments and improvements in infrastructure, putting it at a top position in the Middle East[11].

The contract complies with eth WTO and entails responsibilities and commitments that allow access of both nations to the international business community. Moreover, it indicates the strong historical bond between the two countries whereby Jordan is presented with a chance to safeguard its payments balance while the US, on the other hand, poses opportunities for easy access to global markets, settlement of disputes and unified mechanisms of consultations.

The treaty is a direct pathway to the identification of new unique trade opportunities and recognizes the rise in the favorable market for international trade and investment in the services and manufacturing businesses. Jordan is positioned at a leading position due to its central location in the Middle East, its resources, trade contracts with the US, and good infrastructure and a wide range of investments. Jordan has a favorable site for various investments in the security, information technology, financial, engineering, tourism, manufacturing, automobile, and infrastructure sectors[12]. Jordan has a favorable position in the competition for consumer products because of the costs of manufacturing and stable industrial policies facilitated by JUSFTA up to the year 2015.

Other additional advantages in Jordan are the telecommunications, data conveyance services, and dissemination, which allow the investing firms from other nations to identify business sites In Jordan for a variety of businesses. The Free trade agreement gives ten-year duration where all duties payable on local goods and the United States should be eliminated. Jordan and the United States have secured specific trade access treaties on the four main modes of supply in the sectors that deal with services[13].

JUSFTA dictates that goods from either US or Jordan should be given special treatment as long as they abide by the 35% domestic value addition as well as providing 15% or less of the content presented by the other country to be added to the 35%. JUSFTA offers security for trademarks, copyrights, geographical indications and the safeguarding of software and pharmaceuticals[14]. Medicines and software are more susceptible to violations, and therefore they require maximum protection. Jordan has made treaties with the World Intellectual Property Organization which have been operational in April 2004 and signed the copyright law of allowing WCT in Jordan. Contracts like this none provide robust security to the TRIPS agreement and accounts for the internet invention.

 

Enforcement and Implementations of the IP provisions of JUSFTA

In efforts to limit access to the benefits of the agreement, Rules of Origin were explicitly applied to the JUSFTA to determine from what country a product is imported, primarily when

two or more states contribute to its production. Since the United States already has a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) with Jordan, the JUSFTA does not include an investment chapter. Since the signing of this treaty, the United States has made similar agreements with other. Countries in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, such as Bahrain and Morocco, as well as countries outside the MENA regions like Singapore, Australia, and Vietnam[15]. The JUSFTA’s inclusion of terms on labor and the environment became the standard language for all. Future FTAs signed with the United States. However, despite its ground-breaking nature, there

Since 1999, there has been a growing concern that the JUSFTA carries imbalances in the area of IPRs. This has resulted from the Jordanian policymakers’ lack of familiarity with that subject and a lack of internal consultation when Jordan acceded to the WTO and negotiated the JUSFTA. Moreover, the JUSFTA’s inclusion of international standards higher than those under TRIPS ushered Jordan into a new period of what is now known as the TRIPS-plus standard; that is, a level of protection for IPRs higher than that demanded or contemplated by the TRIPS agreement itself.

Additionally, the JUSFTA grants evidentiary presumption for the Owners of copyright and related rights for ownership of the copyright-related Rights, in both civil and criminal cases.  JUSFTA expands the definition of trademarks by entailing geographical indications, even though under the TRIPS trademarks and geographical indications are treated separately (Deere, 2008). Furthermore, the JUSFTA introduced several new obligations in this area, one of them being the commitment to join the treaty about the Madrid Agreement Concerning International Registration of Marks.

The second one is the requirement to give effect to articles 1 through 6 of the Joint Recommendation about the Provisions on the security of famous marks implemented by the Paris assembly concerned with the protection of industrial property and the General Assembly of WIPO[16]. Thirdly is the requirement not to need a recording of trademark licenses to determine the legality of the license or to provide any rights in a trademark. The last one is the requirement to raise the maximum criminal fine to JD 6000, which was included in paragraph 3 of the Memorandum of Understanding between Jordan and the United States.

In the provision of copyrights, JUSFTA has incorporated requirements which include the allowing producers and performers of phonograms to prohibit the broadcasting of their work without their authority[17]. The second one is the Giving right holders the mandate to supervise or control the importation of secured jobs regardless of whether it is authorized or pirated. The last requirement is asking the signatories to withstand technology that might be aimed at weakening the technological strategies applied by producers and performers about the exercise of their rights.

In the provision of the patent, the new patent law that was put in place in 1999 according to the obligations of TRIPS introduced new patent regulations to govern the patent filing process. Besides the duties in the TRIPS agreement, JUSFTA brought about new requirements in the patent filing, one of them being the act of, making available an extended patent term to cover for the patent holder due to curtailment of the patent for no reason due to marketing approval process. The other requirement is the making a commitment to becoming a member of the Patent Cooperation Treaty which Jordan has yet to do.

The Protection of Trademarks, Copyrights, and patents under JUSFTA

The rise has been realized in the help offered to Jordan by the U.S since the mid-1990s in efforts to strengthen the Jordanian economy and maintain economic stability as well as promote healthy relations with Israel. Jordan is focused on achieving maximum benefits from joining JUSFTA including favorable treatment on products that have been exported to the U.S market[18]. JUSFTA offers TRIPS IP law provisions which call for the need to carry out and make regulatory changes which go beyond Jordan agreement concerning WTO, WPPT, WCT access.

JUSFTA’s article number 4 deals with IP and is regarded as the greatest of the entire FTA provisions[19]. The article entails specific provisions which safeguard trademarks, copyrights, related rights, geographical indications, and patents. JUSFTA is concerned with IP enforcement in the inclusion of remedial measures, injunctions, and damages. It also has a memorandum of Understanding about the issues concerning the protection of intellectual property rights specifically regarding copyrights and patent, which is one of the things that Jordan should meet.

Further, some TRIPS-plus provisions in the JUSFTA require Jordan to make IP treaties that are not in the TRIPS agreement. FTAs signed between Arab countries and the US have been noted to contain extensive provisions dealing with various forms of IP which are not controversial from the FTA Jordan. Moreover, some go beyond JUSFTA in demand for a rise in the level of IP protection specifically regarding extending the term of copyright for 50-70 years after the author dies[20]. According to Ahmed Abdel Latif, it is not defined whether the obligations in TRIPS by the national laws develop from conscious, intentional decisions, made by policymakers and legislators. The obligations mostly extend from insufficient legislative advice which the Arab countries receive as they try to modernize their IP laws by particular bilateral donors and global organizations with interest to establish and maintain high standards of intellectual property.

Compatibility of the Current Jordanian IP law with the text of JUSFTA

The MoIT founding dates back to the 1950s. According to its law, it is in charge of regulating the industrial activity in Jordan and preparing the programs aimed at improving its competitiveness. It also takes on the responsibility for the regulation of internal and external trade through monitoring and the preparation of the studies and agreements that serve those purposes. The scope of the MoIT’s significant role in IP administration and enforcement revolves around the IPPD and the JISM.

The IPPD is responsible for supervising the registration and classification of trademarks, designs, layout designs of integrated circuits and patents. The JISM works through the border points to inspect and validate goods bearing a specific logo to assure their authenticity[21]. Nonconforming goods with counterfeit marks are confiscated and destroyed. The IPPD registers trademarks and maintains records of active ones by the requirements of the Trademark Law, which stipulates that a trademark registrar is established to carry out those duties. Similarly, the IPPD houses the registration function for patents, designs and industrial models, and layout designs of integrated circuits as mandated by those respective laws.

By being the registrar for trademarks, patents, designs and industrial models, and integrated circuits, the IPPD is responsible for managing the opposition to trademarks, copyrights, industrial design and integrated courses, as well as, handling trademark cancellation requests[22]. The small number of patents filed and granted raises questions about the feasibility for resource allocation for the development of a patent administration and enforcement system, which would require considerable resources and expertise, mainly if it includes the highly technical patent prosecution phase.

Currently, it seems that Jordan had opted not to allocate considerable resources to a patent administration and examination system, as it is relying on the WIPO and its technical integration into the network of Western world patent offices for the examination and searches of patents. For patents filed outside Jordan, a Jordanian patent award is almost automatic, which explains the surge in the number of international patent applications, as Jordan has become an easy and inexpensive patenting venue. But filing award times can vary, likely due to the dependency on foreign agencies for patent examination, as the Jordanian patent office has only four examiners[23]. The discrepancy between the number of national and international patent filings, with the latter far outstripping the former, can be the result of the weak local research and development spending.

 

Jordanian IPRs Protection

It is believed that the introduction of the minimum standards and massive Intellectual property rights enforcement through a contract of the Trade-related aspects of intellectual property (TRIPS adequately facilitated the major industrialized nations requirements of IPRs. It seems that this agreement smoothened the path for a stronger framework of IPRs. With the failure of seeking TRIPS negotiations, the United States and other developed countries almost commenced the negotiations for the inclusion of increased harmonization, stronger mechanisms of enforcement and the weakening flexibilities as well as expanded coverage.

With many unsuccessful efforts to make the IPRs in TRIPS healthy in the years after its implementation and about the Seattle Ministerial failure in 1999, these countries have changed their focus of these efforts from the multilateral platform to the regional and bilateral free trade agreements. Therefore, as the developing countries make efforts to implement their responsibilities under TRIPS, developed countries were in the process of increasing their IPRs levels through Free Trade Agreements[24]. In this section, the United States is at the top position in the promotion of higher standards of Intellectual Property Rights.

As the US uses a bilateral method to achieve substantial gains, protection, and flexibilities of the developing countries through compressing TRIPS, the view does not entirely capture the general history of Intellectual Property Rights. In focusing on the IP from a broader perspective, it is seen that TRIPS do not account for the agreement on IPRs which was thought to be. Instead, it is just a sample of a more extended process which developed countries involve in regionalism, multilateralism, and bilateralism to boost their interests and safeguard concessions from developed countries.

 

The Effect of Dispute Settlement Process

There have been recent discussions on member’s commitments regarding substantive levels of protection of intellectual property rights which fall under the local laws as well as the process of enforcing them through regional legal strategies. A vital feature in the Trips agreement is that conflicts between governments concerning the abiding by members with the obligations in TRIPS are to be subjected to the dispute settlement system of the World Trade Organizations[25].

The Trips provisions about a settlement of conflicts are recorded in part V of the TRIPS agreement under the title, ‘Dispute Prevention Settlement. ‘Dispute settlement remains a significant aspect of the WTO legal system. There are several TRIPS provisions employed by TRIPS and working strategies that relate to TRIPS concerning transparency, with an objective of preventing disputes that arise between governments[26]. Certain principles are put in place to govern the process of dispute settlement with the inclusion of the WTO jurisdiction, where specific WTO dispute settlement procedures are applied. There is an issue that remains with no solution up to date, about the application of the violation and complaints of situations to disputes settlement under TRIPS Agreement.

Agreements are made in bilateral negotiations by the Members concerned, mostly in capitals, without the inclusion of the dispute settlement procedures of the DSB[27]. Many issues have erupted as a result of reviewing the national TRIPS implementing legislation done by the TRIPS Council. However, these issues rarely get a follow up in dispute settlement proceedings. Despite the inclusion of formal dispute settlement procedures, it is recommendable to develop a mutually acceptable solution consistent with the WTO provisions; to a problem between members. In fact, the settlement rate has so far been quite high in the area of TRIPS. As of July 2011, 29 dispute settlement complaints had been initiated in the WTO in the field of TRIPS and about 23 distinct matters or specific cases. When panel reports are made, they are adopted in ten situations.

Fourteen cases have been settled bilaterally between the parties involved in the dispute; the terms of these settlements are made public and can be valuable in influencing the way others implement the Agreement. As regards the rest, consultations are still pending, or the case becomes inactive. Some of the early TRIPS cases only concerned transitional arrangements. For example, the first TRIPS complaint involved the extent to which sound recordings that had been made before the TRIPS Agreement became applicable had to be protected, two cases that were both settled)[28]. The first two panel and appellate reports were issued on two complaints concerning the so-called mailbox and exclusive marketing rights provisions in paragraphs 8 and 9 of Article 70.

 

The Effects on Access to Pharmaceuticals                                                                         

Following the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995 and implementation of the TRIPS agreement, the United States (US) made efforts to seek higher levels of intellectual property rights on developing countries, a feature that was named up to today as TRIPS-Plus[29]. The Jordan–US Free Trade Agreement, signed contains several TRIPS rules that prohibit the poor’s access to medicines and is regarded as of many benefits to the by the Us trade representatives and government officials as well as specific pharmaceutical interests.

Some of these benefits include a higher growth rate as well as improved knowledge in generic medicine and innovative research well as the process of creating partnerships with international drug manufacturers.  With the implementation of TRIPS under the World Trade Organization, TRIPS became among the most significant inventions in the effectiveness of multilateral Trade System. Although it offers a moderately high protection standard of the intellectual property rights, the United States keeps on making efforts to heighten the levels of intellectual property rights in developing countries which restrict medicine access to the poor[30]. One of such mechanisms that have been growing since the commencement of the twenty-first century is the bilateral free trade which various developing countries have adopted.

Jordan has been recognized as the first among the Arab countries to join the Free Trade Agreement. There were several rules regarding TRUST plus which were put in place by the Jordan US FTA in spite of the substantial proof which strongly shows TRIPS rules prohibit the access to cheap medicine[31]. The defined set of rules have been seen to have adverse effects for Jordan and the poor in the country The Jordan US FTA is identified among the countries where the idea of globalization has significantly changed the economic nature of the state and benefited the biomedical and pharmaceutical sectors in particular. These benefits are evident in the improved accessibility to drugs to all citizens in Jordan at affordable costs and the availability of international pharmaceutical enterprises in the country[32]. There have been claims about the ability of domestic firms in Jordan to manufacture generic drugs and involve in innovative research in efforts to improve their services to the patients.

Special 301 Report

A unique 301 report was released by the office of the United States Trade Representative in 2017 concerning the intellectual property rights and global development and recognizing the trading partners who possess criminal protection records and enforcement as well as access to the Us market. The report demands the US traders to look into the IP trade hindrances mainly on the countries that are categorized on the priority list. The report also outlines the critical administration trade points to ensure that the US fully acquire a chance to benefit from their intellectual rights all over the world. The rise in theft of intellectual property has led to weak markets and unfairness in trade practices that are harmful to the service providers, innovators and business people, both large and small scale.

There is assured commitment of the administration to use every source available of leverage to motivate other nations to establish their markets to US exports of services and goods as well as the provision of sufficient protection and enforcement of IPRs[33]. Individual elements have been pointed out in the report, one of them being placing China at the priority list regarding the coercive technology requirements, impediments required in effective enforcement of Intellectual property and strong and new Intellectual Property attention. India is also placed on the priority list due to its insufficient improvements in the framework of intellectual property. Another aspect that the report identifies is the rampant piracy and counterfeit goods cases. Trademarks experience counterfeits at both local and global levels which is a significant threat to the producers, the consumers, and the government.

There’s also a detailed focus on the adverse effects of market access of the European Union strategy towards the protection of third party markets and the geographical indications on the United States producers and traders[34]. The last element that the report focuses on is the issue concerning the improvements that have been noted in Pakistan and Spain. Pakistan on its part has established and maintained a recommendable trend in its efforts to change its way of protecting intellectual property. Spain, on the other hand, has been gradually strengthening its laws that govern criminal acts for Intellectual property violation and implied a commitment to eliminating piracy in online sites. The USTR declares that it will keep an eye on the Tajikistan and Colombia progress on their intellectual property issues.

IPR Standards and Foreign Investment Decisions

It is imperative to consider the economic incentives before determining the effects of weak or strong IPRs protection on the choices to make global investments[35]. One of the strategies applied is the Ownership Location Internalization theory which starts by recognizing corporations have ownership benefits such as local firms as liquid assets. Most of the assets employ unique technological forms and informal knowledge which the employees share among themselves, alongside particular skills of organization, quality reputation, and others. Nevertheless, despite recognizing that the benefits of ownership are vital, there are inadequate abroad investments[36]. Most companies that own liquid assets make foreign arm ‘s length trade whereby the international market must provide advantages of location to make the process of establishing a business abroad effective and profit maximizing.

The advantages of location are related to some aspects such as low input prices, high costs of transporting goods, local regulatory environments, distribution networks access and high tariffs. Another consideration is that the process must be of profit for the two parties to make their productions internal instead of selling or leasing their intellectual property rights to the domestic independent companies the foreign country. Advantages of internalization include avoiding the cost of a transaction with the potential licenses, monitoring the inputs and safeguarding the product quality.

The OLI strategy is useful in the identification of impact of IPR to the safeguarding of the firm’s choice to invest overseas. The advantages of ownership are linked to the intellectual assets to the investment in foreign trade. There is only a minor portion of the assets that can be protected by the conventional IPR systems[37]. Nevertheless, the aspect of ownership has two direct effects. On the other hand, the companies that come up with intellectual property have a high probability of engaging in foreign investments.

The Intellectual property right policy has the direct influence on the decision that is made by firms to make foreign investments through the utilization of advantages of ownership. The protection of intellectual property is also seen as an advantage of location because IPRs operate according to territories which make them different across international borders[38]. In consideration of the globalization aspect that we are in, there is the need for the governments to dedicate particular attention to their regulatory environment. IPR protection can also influence a firm’s decision to either make its intellectual assets internal or external.

 

Conclusion

It is a complicated process to try and identify the impacts of changing IPR protection and the economic effects of having robust Intellectual Property protection are still undefined. Having stronger IPR regulations and their implementation can be used in the production of reliable results. Stronger IPR strategies can indicate stronger institutions as well as support from the government from the process of guiding domestic companies towards technological advancement.

 

Bibliography

Anderson, K., & Winters, L. A. (2008). The challenge of reducing international trade and migration barriers (No. 6760). World Bank Publications.

Anderson, K., & Winters, L. A. The Challenge of Subsidies and Trade Barriers.

Bird, R. C. (2009). Developing nations and the compulsory license: maximizing access to essential medicines while minimizing investment side effects. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 37(2), 209-221.

Breitwieser, A. (2010). Intellectual property rights and economic growth (Doctoral dissertation, unified).

Cheng, T. K. (2012). A Developmental Approach to the Patent-Antitrust Interface. Nw. J. Int’l L. & Bus., 33, 1.

Correa, C. M., & Yusuf, A. (Eds.). (2008). Intellectual property and international trade: the TRIPs agreement. Kluwer Law International.

DAILY, J. E., KIEFF, F. S., & WILMARTH JR, A. E. (2014). Introduction. In Perspectives on Financing Innovation (pp. 13-16). Routledge.

Deere, C. (2008). The implementation game: the TRIPS Agreement and the global politics of intellectual property reform in developing countries. OUP Oxford.

Di Vita, G. (2013). The TRIPs agreement and technological innovation. Journal of Policy Modeling, 35(6), 964-977.

El‐Said, H., & El‐Said, M. (2007). TRIPS‐Plus implications for access to medicines in developing countries: lessons from Jordan–United States Free Trade Agreement. The Journal of world intellectual property, 10(6), 438-475.

Frankel, S., & Gervais, D. (2013). Plain Packaging and the Interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement. Vand. J. Transnat’l L., 46, 1149.

Kale, D., & Wield, D. (2008). Exploitative and explorative learning as a response to the TRIPS agreement in Indian pharmaceutical firms. Industry and Innovation, 15(1), 93-114.

Koff, A. W., Baughman, L. M., Francois, J. F., & McDaniel, C. A. (2011). Study on the Economic Impact of “TRIPS-Plus” Free Trade Agreements. International Intellectual Property Institute, Washington, DC Available at http://iipi. org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/IIPI-USPTO-TRIPS-Plus-Study-10-Aug-2011. Pdf

Li, X. (2008). The impact of higher standards in patent protection for pharmaceutical industries under the trips agreement–a comparative study of China and India. The World Economy, 31(10), 1367-1382.

Maskus, K. E. (2012). Private rights and public problems: the global economics of intellectual property in the 21st century. Peterson Institute.

Park, W. G. (2008). International patent protection: 1960–2005. Research Policy, 37(4), 761-766.

Schwartz, C., Baughman, L. M., Francois, J. F., & McDaniel, C. A. (2012). Technical Assistance for Intellectual Property Right Protection: Effects on US Exports.

Sieber-Gasser, C. (2016). Developing Countries and Preferential Services Trade (Vol. 25). Cambridge University Press.

Yang, B. (2010). An analysis of the impact of intellectual property rights on Chinese students. Liberty University.

Yu, P. K. (2009). The objectives and principles of the TRIPS agreement. Hous. L. Rev., 46, 979.

[1] Koff, A. W., Baughman, L. M., Francois, J. F., & McDaniel, C. A. (2011). Study on the Economic Impact of “TRIPS-Plus” Free Trade Agreements. International Intellectual Property Institute, Washington, DC Available at http://iipi. org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/IIPI-USPTO-TRIPS-Plus-Study-10-Aug-2011. Pdf

[2] Sieber-Gasser, C. (2016). Developing Countries and Preferential Services Trade (Vol. 25). Cambridge University Press.

 

[3] Sieber-Gasser, C. (2016). Developing Countries and Preferential Services Trade (Vol. 25). Cambridge University Press.

[4] Bird, R. C. (2009). Developing nations and the compulsory license: maximizing access to essential medicines while minimizing investment side effects. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 37(2), 209-221.

[5] Kale, D., & Wield, D. (2008). Exploitative and explorative learning as a response to the TRIPS agreement in Indian pharmaceutical firms. Industry and Innovation, 15(1), 93-114.

[6] Schwartz, C., Baughman, L. M., Francois, J. F., & McDaniel, C. A. (2012). Technical Assistance for Intellectual Property Right Protection: Effects on US Exports.

[7] Park, W. G. (2008). International patent protection: 1960–2005. Research Policy, 37(4), 761-766.

[8] Park, W. G. (2008). International patent protection: 1960–2005. Research Policy, 37(4), 761-766.

[9] DAILY, J. E., KIEFF, F. S., & WILMARTH JR, A. E. (2014). Introduction. In Perspectives on Financing Innovation (pp. 13-16). Routledge.

[10] Yang, B. (2010). An analysis of the impact of intellectual property rights on Chinese students. Liberty University.

[11] Park, W. G. (2008). International patent protection: 1960–2005. Research Policy, 37(4), 761-766.

[12] Sieber-Gasser, C. (2016). Developing Countries and Preferential Services Trade (Vol. 25). Cambridge University Press.

[13] Yu, P. K. (2009). The objectives and principles of the TRIPS agreement. Hous. L. Rev., 46, 979.

[14] Sieber-Gasser, C. (2016). Developing Countries and Preferential Services Trade (Vol. 25). Cambridge University Press.

[15] Deere, C. (2008). The implementation game: the TRIPS Agreement and the global politics of intellectual property reform in developing countries. OUP Oxford.

[16] Deere, C. (2008). The implementation game: the TRIPS Agreement and the global politics of intellectual property reform in developing countries. OUP Oxford.

[17] Sieber-Gasser, C. (2016). Developing Countries and Preferential Services Trade (Vol. 25). Cambridge University Press.

[18] Frankel, S., & Gervais, D. (2013). Plain Packaging and the Interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement. Vand. J. Transnat’l L., 46, 1149.

[19] Schwartz, C., Baughman, L. M., Francois, J. F., & McDaniel, C. A. (2012). Technical Assistance for Intellectual Property Right Protection: Effects on US Exports.

 

[20] Schwartz, C., Baughman, L. M., Francois, J. F., & McDaniel, C. A. (2012). Technical Assistance for Intellectual Property Right Protection: Effects on US Exports.

 

[21] Kale, D., & Wield, D. (2008). Exploitative and explorative learning as a response to the TRIPS agreement in Indian pharmaceutical firms. Industry and Innovation, 15(1), 93-114.

[22] Cheng, T. K. (2012). A Developmental Approach to the Patent-Antitrust Interface. Nw. J. Int’l L. & Bus., 33, 1.

[23] Breitwieser, A. (2010). Intellectual property rights and economic growth (Doctoral dissertation, unified).

[24] Frankel, S., & Gervais, D. (2013). Plain Packaging and the Interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement. Vand. J. Transnat’l L., 46, 1149.

[25] Anderson, K., & Winters, L. A. (2008). The challenge of reducing international trade and migration barriers (No. 6760). World Bank Publications.

[26] Park, W. G. (2008). International patent protection: 1960–2005. Research Policy, 37(4), 761-766.

[27] Anderson, K., & Winters, L. A. The Challenge of Subsidies and Trade Barriers.

[28] Park, W. G. (2008). International patent protection: 1960–2005. Research Policy, 37(4), 761-766.

[29] Bird, R. C. (2009). Developing nations and the compulsory license: maximizing access to essential medicines while minimizing investment side effects. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 37(2), 209-221.

[30] El‐Said, H., & El‐Said, M. (2007). TRIPS‐Plus implications for access to medicines in developing countries: lessons from Jordan–United States Free Trade Agreement. The Journal of world intellectual property, 10(6), 438-475.

[31] Bird, R. C. (2009). Developing nations and the compulsory license: maximizing access to essential medicines while minimizing investment side effects. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 37(2), 209-221.

[32] Li, X. (2008). The impact of higher standards in patent protection for pharmaceutical industries under the trips agreement–a comparative study of China and India. The World Economy, 31(10), 1367-1382.

[33] Breitwieser, A. (2010). Intellectual property rights and economic growth (Doctoral dissertation, unified).

[34] Breitwieser, A. (2010). Intellectual property rights and economic growth (Doctoral dissertation, unified).

[35] Koff, A. W., Baughman, L. M., Francois, J. F., & McDaniel, C. A. (2011). Study on the Economic Impact of “TRIPS-Plus” Free Trade Agreements. International Intellectual Property Institute, Washington, DC Available at http://iipi.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/IIPI-USPTO-TRIPS-Plus-Study-10-Aug-2011. Pdf

[36] Yang, B. (2010). An analysis of the impact of intellectual property rights on Chinese students. Liberty University.

[37] Di Vita, G. (2013). The TRIPs agreement and technological innovation. Journal of Policy Modeling, 35(6), 964-977.

[38] Maskus, K. E. (2012). Private rights and public problems: the global economics of intellectual property in the 21st century. Peterson Institute.

The Enforcement of IPRs in Jordan

Is this question part of your Assignment?

We can help

Our aim is to help you get A+ grades on your Coursework.

We handle assignments in a multiplicity of subject areas including Admission Essays, General Essays, Case Studies, Coursework, Dissertations, Editing, Research Papers, and Research proposals

Header Button Label: Get Started NowGet Started Header Button Label: View writing samplesView writing samples