메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
이선 (한국생명공학연구원) 장영효 (한국생명공학연구원)
저널정보
국제법평론회 국제법평론 국제법평론 제68호
발행연도
2024.6
수록면
75 - 99 (25page)
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25197/kilr.2024.68.75

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
After 25 years of negotiations at the Intergovernmental Committee of World International Property Organization (WIPO), the WIPO treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge (hereinafter referred to as “WIPO Treaty”) was adopted. Since the WIPO treaty primarily aims at preventing biopiracy through promoting benefit-sharing with genetic resource-providing countries (hereinafter referred to as “provider countries”) by requiring the disclosure of the origins of genetic resources in patent applications, it is crucial to evaluate whether the treaty would actually contribute to reduction of biopiracy without hindering efficient operation of the existing ABS mechanism. In this regard, this study argues that the Treaty may not effectively ensure ABS compliance for the following reasons. First, the WIPO treaty does not consider the designation of patent offices as checkpoints under the Nagoya Protocol. If patent offices are designated as such, they would be responsible for receiving not only documents on disclosure of origin but also evidence of Prior Informed Consent (PIC) and Mutually Agreed Terms (MAT). This could impose a significant burden on patent offices in provider countries, especially developing ones, which often lack the trained personnel and resources to assess compliance on the ABS requirements such as PIC and MAT. This additional responsibility could delay patent examination processes and increase costs, contradicting the treaty's goal of maintaining an efficient patent system. Second, the treaty's requirement to disclose the origins of genetic resources extends to inventions based on resources accessed before the CBD or Nagoya Protocol came into effect. This could complicate patent applications, as current international patent systems established under TRIPS do not mandate such disclosures. Countries utilizing genetic resources (hereinafter referred to as “user countries”) may have little incentive to voluntarily adopt these requirements through national legislation. Additionally, genetic resources used for commercial purposes are often sourced from ex-situ private institutions or intermediaries, typically collected before the CBD or Nagoya Protocol, making it difficult to determine their origins. This places the burden of proof on patent applicants, who are unable to identify the origin of genetic resource, adding inefficiency to the patent office's review process. Third, Article 8 of the WIPO treaty potentially extends the disclosure requirement to derivatives and Digital Sequence Information (DSI), which could create confusion in the ABS regime and the establishment of a benefit-sharing system for DSI. Tracking the origin of derivatives is challenging, and including them in disclosure requirements would complicate the system and burden both applicants and patent offices. If DSI is also subjected to disclosure requirements, even more significant implications could arise. User countries have advocated for a multilateral approach to sharing of benefits arising from use of DSI due to issues with tracking origins and ensuring open access. If disclosure of origin is required for DSI-based inventions, provider countries might demand bilateral benefit-sharing agreements, complicating the administrative process and reducing efficiency. Obligations on disclosure of origin for DSI in relation to patent applications could hinder research and innovation, as tracking the origins and use of DSI is notoriously difficult. In conclusion, while the WIPO treaty aims to prevent biopiracy through the disclosure of genetic resource origins, it has clear limitations in achieving this goal. To mitigate these issues, it is recommended to establish procedural requirements for patent offices that only involve formal checks for document completeness. Furthermore, genetic resources outside the Nagoya Protocol's scope should not be subject to disclosure requirements, which should be addressed through national legislation in user countries. Finally, extensive efforts should be made in future negotiations to exclude derivatives and DSI from disclosure requirements or at least establish more flexible requirements to reduce the burden on patent applicants.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0