INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND HUMAN RIGHTS: EVIDENCES OF DISSONANCE

Author
, associate professor, Kharkiv, Pushinska, 77

In heading

 Economic theory;

Signed print

 23.10.2015

Issues number

 2015 - № 4 (23)

Page

 28-41

Type of articles

 Scientific article

Code UDK

 330.1:347.77/78

ISSN print

 2411-5584

Abstract

 Problem setting. Nowadays, the research concerned with directions of reformation of a system for reservation and protection of intellectual property rights (RPIPR) in the context of its harmonization with human rights are of considerable importance.
Recent research and publications analysis. Issues of reconsideration of intellectual property rights from the standpoint of providing human rights were researched in scientific papers of L. Lessig, A. Vorozhevych, K. Afanasieva, O. Kashyntseva, M. Boldrin, K. Lewin, V. Valle, who comprehensively considered disadvantages of a current system for SPIPR.
Paper objective. The paper objectives are the following: indication and systematization of evidences of dissonance related to intellectual property rights and human rights; substantiation of topicality and expediency of the reformation of the SPIPR system from the standpoint of priority of a principle of adherence to human rights.
Paper main body. Globalization and its constituent processes have caused contradictions between human rights and intellectual property rights. Natural human rights have appeared to be secondary with respect to intellectual property rights. The evidences of dissonance of intellectual property rights and human rights within a patent system emerge in fields of health protection (pharmacy) and food production (agriculture). A patent for medicine enables an owner to prohibit import and production of medicines, which use an
invention protected by the patent. Unification of minimal standards of RPIPR within the WTO (the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) negatively influences accessibility of medicines in less developed countries. In a case of application of mechanisms of obligatory licensing or parallel import by developing countries, developed countries can provide sanctions. Intellectual property rights for plant kinds restrict opportunities of performing the agriculture activity. Consequences of such restrictions are violation of rights to access to food goods and plant kinds, transferring technologies, and denying local communities the opportunity to control traditional knowledge and cultural values. Contradictions with human rights in the process of functioning of systems of copyright and related rights are the most noticeable in the following areas: a right to receiving and dissemination of information; a right to privacy of correspondence; a right to access to cultural heritage; a right to freedom of speech.
Conclusions of the research. Realization of economic, cultural, and social human rights under conditions of globalization more usually comes into conflict with the system of intellectual property rights. The reformation of the RPIPR system should be carried out in the direction of harmonization of intellectual property rights with human rights from the standpoint of the latter.
Short Abstract for an article
Abstract. The author has formulated an issue of violation of a principle of adherence to the basic human rights as a primary principle in the process of building a system for reservation and protection of intellectual property rights (RPIPR) under conditions of globalization. The article researches the evidences of dissonance between intellectual property rights and human rights (rights to life, health, access to information, cultural
heritage, and freedom of speech, etc.). The author has substantiated a conclusion on topicality of the reformation of the current RPIPR system from the standpoint of priority of human rights. Directions of solution of conflict situations are proposed.

Keywords

 Intellectual property, human rights, transnational corporations, obligatory licensing.

Reviewer

External reviewer

Article in PDF

 4 28-41

Bibliography

 1. Lessyh L. (2007) Svobodnaya kul’tura: per. s anhl. Retrieved from: http://artpragmatika.
ru/Lessig.
2. Afanas’yeva (Hors’ka) K. (2014). Zminy kontseptual’nykh zasad avtors’ko-pravovoho
rehulyuvannya v umovakh hlobalizatsiyi informatsiynoho prostoru. Teoriya i praktyka
intelektual’noyi vlasnosti, 5. 5-13.
3. Vorozhevych A.S. Isklyuchitel’noe pravo i fundamental’nyie prava cheloveka:
vozmozhno li izbezhat’ konflikta? Zhurnal Suda po intellektual’nyim pravam. Retrieved
from: www.ipcmagazine.ru.
4. O . Kashyntseva. (2015). Natsional’na patentna reforma u sferi okhorony zdorov"ya na
zasadakh verkhovenstva prav lyudyny. Teoriya i praktyka intelektual’noyi vlasnosti,
3. 6 -11.
5. Androshchuk H. (2014). Hromads’ke zdorov’ya, likars’ki zasoby y intelektual’na
vlasnist’: stan i problemy. Teoriya i praktyka intelektual’noyi vlasnosti, 1. 73-84.
6. Boldrin Michele, David K. Levine. Against Intellectual Monopoly. Retrieved from:
http://www.micheleboldrin.com/recearch/aim.html.
7. Vallye Vira. (2010). Paradoksy prava intelektual’noyi vlasnosti. Retrieved from: http://
www.academia.edu.
8. Vseobshchaya deklaratsyya prav cheloveka. Retrieved from: www.zakon0.rada.gov.ua
9. O fitsiynyy sayt NDI IV NAPrNU. Retrieved from: www.ndiiv.org.ua/ua/kontseptsija.
html.
10. Budyilyn S. Vinni-Pukh vstupaet v VTO. Problema avtorskikh prav na «staryie»
inostrannyie proizvedeniya/ Zhurnal Suda po intellektual’nyim pravam. Retrieved
from: www.ipcmagazine.ru.
11. Vorontsova K. (2014). Prava sub’yektiv intelektual’noyi vlasnosti na tradytsiyni
znannya u sferi okhorony zdorov’ya. Teoriya i praktyka intelektual’noyi vlasnosti,
6. 21–28.
12. Alekseeva D. A. (2015). Intellektual’naya sobstvennost’ i obshchestvennoe razvitie:
problemyi effektivnosti i spravedlyvosti. Voprosyi filosofij, 3. 63-72. Retrieved from:
http://www.vphil.ru.
13. Informatsiyno-analitychna dovidka do slukhan’u Komiteti Verkhovnoyi Rady Ukrayiny
z pytan’ nauky i osvity «Intelektual’na vlasnist’v Ukrayini. Stan ta kontseptual’ni
zasady rozvytku». Retrieved from: www.kho.rada.gov.ua.
14. Senchykhyn V. (2015). Provayderam ne pozdorovytsya. Ezhenedel’nyk «2000», 37–38.
15. Nasledniki Struhatskikh vyistupayut protiv svobodnoho dostupa k kniham fantastov.
Retrieved from: www.pro-books.ru/news/3/14887.
16. Medya-pyratstvo v razvyvayushchikhsya ekonomikakh. (2014). Pod redaktsiey Dzho
Karnahesa. Nauchnyiy otchet. Intelektual’na vlasnist’, 10. Chastyna 2. 41-48
17. Kharchenko V. (2015). Protydiya intelektual’nomu piratstvu v Ukrayini: zabezpechennya
okhorony prav intelektual’noyi vlasnosti chy sposib vplyvu na derzhavnu polityku ta
mekhanizm nedobrosovisnoyi konkurentsiyi? Teoriya i praktyka intelektual’noyi
vlasnosti, 3. 66 -74.

Code DOI

This post is also available in: Ukrainian

17.09.2015