WTO dispute settlement: Of sovereign interests, private rights, and public goods

International Public Goods and Transfer of Technology Under a Globalized Intellectual Property Regime

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 817-830

  Pauwelyn, Joost ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84927002381     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511494529.042     Document Type: Chapter

References (39)

1. Peter Drahos, The Regulation of Public Goods [this volume];
2. Keith E. Maskus & Jerome H. Reichman, The Globalization of Private Knowledge Goods and the Privatization of Global Public Goods [this volume].
3. GLOBAL PUBLICGOODS: INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN THE 21 STCENT URY (Inge Kaul et al. eds., Oxford University Press 1999).
4. AUL A. G OLDSTEIN, INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT: PRINCIPLES, LAW, AND PRACTICE 16 (Oxford University Press 2001).
5. Josh Lerner, 150 Years of Patent Protection, AMERICAN E CONO MIC R EV IEW: PAPERS AND P ROC EEDI NG S vol. 92, at 221–2 25 (2002).
6. EDITH PENROS E, THE ECONOMICS OF THE I NTE RNATIONAL P AT E N T S YSTEM (Johns Hopkins University Press 1951)
7. Phillip McCalman, Reaping What You Sow: An Empirical Analysis of International Patent Harmonization, 55 J. INT’ L E CON. 161 (2001).
8. Eric W. Bond & Jee Hyeong Park, Gradualism in Trade Agreements with Asymmetric Countries, 69 REV. ECON. STUD. 379 (2002).
9. Joost Pauwelyn, WTO Dispute Settlement: Of Sovereign Interests, Private Rights and Public Goods [this volume].
10. Joost Pauwelyn, Enforcement and Countermeasures in the WTO: Rules are Rules – Towards a More Collective Approach, 94 AM. J. INT’ L L. 335 (2000).
11. JOHN H. JACKSON, THE JURISPRUDENCE OF G ATT AND THE WTO, ch. 4 (Cambridge University Press 2000)
12. JOHN H. JACKSON, THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION: CONSTI TUTION AND JURI SPRUDENCE (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1998).
13. Avinash Dixit, Strategic Aspects of Trade Policy, in ADVANCES IN ECONOMIC THEORY (Truman Bewley ed., Cambridge University Press 1987).
14. Mikhail Klimenko et al., Recurrent Trade Agreements and the Value of External Enforcement (2001)
15. Wilfred Ethier, Punishments and Dispute Settlement in Trade Agreements (2001)
16. JOHN H. JACKSON, above n. 22, at 120. Indeed, this process was of particular interest to developing countries.
17. Alan V. Deardorff, Welfare Effects of Global Patent Protection, 59 ECONOMICA 35 (1992);
18. Suzanne Scotchmer, The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Treaties, 20 J.L. ECON. & ORG. 415 (2004).
19. Peter Drahos, The Regulation of Public Goods [this volume];
20. Carlos Correa, Can the TRIPS Agreement Foster Technology Transfer to Developing Countries? [this volume];
21. Gregory Shaffer, Recognizing Public Goods in WTO Dispute Settlement: Who Participates? Who Decides? [this volume];
22. Keith E. Maskus & Jerome H. Reichman, The Globalization of Private Knowledge Goods and the Privatization of Global Public Goods [this volume].
23. Laurence R. Helfer, Regime Shifting: The TRIPS Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking, 29 YALE J. INT’ L L. 1 (2004).
24. Joost Pauwelyn, A Typology of Multilateral Treaty Obligations: Are WTO Obligations Bilateral or Collective in Nature?, 14 EUR. J. INT’ L L. 907 (2003).
25. ROBERT Z. LAWRENCE, CRIMES AND PUNI SHMENTS ?; RETALIATION UNDER THE WTO (Institute for International Economics 2003).
26. INTERNATIONAL LAW AT A TIME OF PERPLEXITY – ES SAYS IN HONOUR OF SHABTAI ROSENNE 623 (Yoram Dinstein & Mala Tabory eds., Dordrecht 1998).
27. Philip Alston, Resisting the Merger and Acquisition of Human Rights by Trade Law: A Reply to Petersmann, 13 EUR. J. INT’ L L. 815 (2002)
28. Robert Howse & K. Nicolaides, Legitimacy and Global Governance: Why Constitutionalizing the WTO is a Step Too Far, in EF F I C IENCY, EQUITY, AND LEGITIMACY: THE MULTILATERAL TRADING SYSTEM AT THE MILLENNIUM (R. Porter et al. eds., 2001).
29. W. Schwartz & A. Sykes, The Economic Structure of Renegotiation and Dispute Resolution in the WTO, 31 J. LEGAL STUD. 179 (2002);
30. Joseph Nye pointed out, “the procedure is like having a fuse in the electrical system of a house – better the fuse blows, than the house burns down” JOSEPH NYE, THE PARADOX OF AMERICAN POWER (2002)
31. U.S. proposal for review, Contribution of the United States to the Improvement of the Dispute Settlement Understanding of the WTO, TN/DS/W/13 (22 Aug. 2002).
32. GAIL E. EVANS, LAWMAKING UNDER THE TRADE CONSTI TUTION –A STUDY IN LEGI SLATING BY THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION 35–50 (2000).
33. Joost Pauwelyn, Enforcement and Countermeasures in the WTO: Rules are Rules – Towards a More Collective Approach, 94 AM. J. INT’ L L. 335 (2000).
34. Joost Pauwelyn, Proposals for Reform of Article 21 of the DSU, in IMPROVEMENTS AND CLAR I FICATIONS OF THE WTO DI SPUTE SETTLEMENT UNDERSTANDING: WTO NEGOTIATORS MEET ACADEMICS (European University Institute 2003).
35. Gabrielle Marceau, A Call for Coherence in International Law – Praises for the Prohibition Against “Clinical Isolation” in WTO Dispute Settlement, 33 J. WORLD TRADE 87 (1999);
36. Joost Pauwelyn, The Role of Public International Law in the WTO: How Far Can We Go?, 95 AM. J. INT’ L L. 535 (2001).
37. United Nations Law of the Sea Convention, opened for signature 10 Dec. 1982.
38. Convention on Biological Diversity, 5 June 1992, 31 I.L.M. 818, available at http://www.biodiv.org/convention/articles.asp (last accessed 28 July 2004).
39. Joost Pauwelyn, What to Make of the WTO Waiver for “Conflict Diamonds”: WTO Compassion or Superiority Complex?, 24 MICH. J. INT’ L L. 1177 (2003).