Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi

Distorted Architecture Of International Intellectual Property Regime And ...the Ministerial Declaration that launched the Uruguay Round negotiationsincluded the trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights as a subjectfor negotiation 39 .II.DISTORTED ARCHITECTURE OF THE IP REGIMEA. Distortion in the EstablishmentAt the end of the Uruguay Round, the Agreement on Trade RelatedAspects of Intellectual Property Rights was established at the ministerialmeeting in Marrakesh in 1994. It engaged intellectual property to tradewhich could not be achieved by the previous international regimes 40 . It couldachieve a new international consensus on the protection of some emergingtechnologies and issues which had never done before. For instance, for thefirst time computer programming technologies included within the intellectualproperty protection regime (Article 10.2) and special protection offered togeographical indications for wines and spirits pursuant to Article 23.As mentioned above, the previous international intellectual propertyregime was like a patchwork which accommodated highly divergent protectionstandards in various national systems. The previous system provided a widerpolicy space for states. The TRIPS Agreement, on the other hand, created a newregime on international intellectual property area imposing a “supranationalcode” on the weaker members of the WTO despite their limited economicdevelopment 41 .The TRIPS Agreement is not an international legislation that can beengaged directly into the national laws of the WTO members, rather it sets theminimum standards to be established and protected by all member states. It isalso important to note that unlike other aspects of the WTO system, “TRIPS[Agreement] is a set of requirements for positive legislative action to establishthe rights and protections mandated by its various articles, rather than merelyrequiring states to refrain from certain actions and practices”. 42 In terms ofthe protection of the intellectual property rights, the agreement is concernedwith the results, not the means. 43 More importantly, unlike the WIPO39DRAHOS, Developing Countries, p.769.40YU, The Global Intellectual Property Order, p.3.41YU, Intellectual Property, p.6.42SELL and MAY, p. 163.43MAY, p.73.Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi C. XV, Y. 2011, Sa. 4 35