+45 60 70 37 20 klexander@gmail.com
Select Page

It is clear that trade agreements will demonstrate their impact on a complex ecosystem in the health sector. Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3.8 highlights the need for “access to safe, effective, quality and affordable medicines” [36]. The assessment of the impact of intellectual property provisions in commercial contracts, regardless of the methodology and limiting methodological implications and restrictions, should include a study on implementation, access, availability and affordability in the national territory; safety, efficiency and quality; rational use of drugs; procurement; and local production capacities. This paper aims to identify the impact of these free trade agreements on intellectual property systems, both internationally and domesticly, and in particular the discontinuities and trends that this relationship (intellectual property rights and trade) generates in developed and underdeveloped countries that are net importers of products related to intellectual property rights. Attention should also be drawn to the strategic approaches put in place by different countries to address this problematic issue [3]. In the final part, it argues that it is currently unlikely to assess the economic impact of this higher ip standard, but argues that free trade agreements have both undermined and will continue to undermine the sovereignty of countries that import net of goods related to intellectual property rights and that they could ultimately have an impact in several areas, that are relevant to the common good of these nation-states. such as public health, education, Aboriginal culture, among others. The fundamental problem with intellectual property rights is that knowledge is a public good, at least in the sense that there are no costs when an additional person enjoys the knowledge covered by an IpR. Economists call this quality exclusivity. If I know something that is not necessary, it means that another person cannot at the same time know that same knowledge. Denying someone the right to have that knowledge or the right to use that knowledge clearly leads to inefficiency. But intellectual property is based on such exclusion. Therefore, knowledge must be considered as a global public good to benefit everyone in the market.

Depriving people in certain countries of the right to use available knowledge entails a global social cost. [34] In the absence of a free trade agreement with the United States, Peru`s knowledge balance would amount to $726 million in 2015 ($614 million due to trade and $112 million for services). In a free trade agreement (using the FTA version of the United States), Peru`s knowledge balance would amount to $1327 million in 2015 ($1183 million due to trade and $144 million for services). Given these figures, INDECOPI concludes that the additional knowledge gap that a free trade agreement with the United States would generate in 2015 amounts to $602 million, or 0.49% of the country`s GDP. . . .