The Paris Convention of 1878 dealt with unfair competition at the most minimalist and least controversial level. Much has been left to national laws to determine for themselves. Bilateral agreements between countries that later became the Member States of the Paris Convention were no longer necessary, since the Paris Convention granted nationals of Member States the same or more rights than had previously been granted to them under those bilateral agreements. The system is not perfect and also has some shortcomings, hence the many legal revisions that take place on an ongoing basis. The Paris Convention provides that each State Party shall grant, in respect of industrial property, the same protection as its nationals in industrial property matters as nationals of the other Contracting State. Third-country nationals are therefore entitled to national treatment under the Convention. The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property was adopted on March 20, 1883. The Treaty marked an important turning point in the development of intellectual property, as it was one of the first intellectual property treaties of its kind. Notably, the treaty is still in force almost 140 years later.
Working in the international economy means that certain rules, including intellectual property laws, are extended to transnational countries. An inventor who wants to protect his invention worldwide can protect it by filing a patent in each country or by filing an international patent application. The international patent application is governed by two major international conventions. The Treaty on International Cooperation in the Field of Patents is a special agreement falling within the scope of the Paris Convention. A State must become a member of the Paris Convention before becoming a member of the PCT. The PCT aims to simplify the patenting process and make it more efficient. It was revised in 1979 and updated in 1984. The PCT makes it possible to obtain patent protection for an invention in a large number of countries at the same time through an international patent application.
In other words, if an applicant files a patent or trade mark application in another EU country, the application receives the same treatment as if it came from a national of that foreign country. In addition, when the intellectual property right is granted (e.B. if the applicant becomes the proprietor of a registered patent or trade mark), the same protection and remedy against infringement, as if the proprietor were a national proprietor of that right. (1) In accordance with the provisions on national treatment, the Convention provides that each Contracting State shall, with respect to the protection of industrial property, accord to nationals of other Contracting States the same protection as it accords to its own nationals. Third-country nationals are also entitled to national treatment under the Convention if they are domiciled in a Contracting State or if they have a real and effective industrial or commercial establishment. The Paris Convention applies to industrial property in the broadest sense, including patents, trademarks, industrial designs, utility models (type of “small patent” provided for by the laws of some countries), service marks, trade names (appellations under which an industrial or commercial activity is carried out), geographical indications (indications of origin and appellations of origin) and the elimination of unfair competition. The general objectives of the TRIPS Agreement are set out in the preamble to the Agreement, which reflects the fundamental objectives of the Uruguay Round negotiations, as set out in the area of TRIPS by the Punta del Este Declaration of 1986 and the Mid-term Review of 1988/89. These objectives include reducing distortions and barriers to international trade, promoting effective and adequate protection of intellectual property rights, and ensuring that enforcement measures and procedures for intellectual property rights do not themselves become barriers to legitimate trade. Those objectives should be read in conjunction with Article 7, entitled `Objectives`, according to which the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights in order to promote technological innovation and the transfer and dissemination of technology, in the mutual interest of producers and users of technological knowledge and in a manner conducive to social and economic well-being, and a balance between rights and obligations. Article 8, entitled “Principles”, recognizes the right of Members to take measures on grounds of public health and public interest and to prevent the abuse of intellectual property rights, provided that such measures are consistent with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement. The TRIPS Agreement requires that undisclosed information – trade secrets or know-how – be protected. In accordance with Article 39(2), protection is to apply to information which is secret, which has commercial value because it is secret and which has been subject to appropriate measures to keep it secret.
The agreement does not require that undisclosed information be treated as a form of ownership, but it does require that an individual who has legal control over that information have the ability to prevent it from being disclosed, acquired or used by others without their consent in a manner that contradicts honest business practices. Conduct contrary to honest business practices includes breach of contract, breach of trust and incitement to breach, as well as the acquisition of undisclosed information by third parties who knew or did not know through gross negligence that such practices were involved in the acquisition. The world of intellectual property offers several possibilities for protecting inventions across borders. Therefore, it is up to inventors to make the best possible use of the possibilities of protection of their inventions. The Paris Convention covers many forms of “industrial property”, not just trademarks. The Paris Convention provides that each country that is a party to the Treaty shall grant the same protection to trademark registrations of another country that is also a Party to the Treaty. For example, if a U.S. company files a trademark application in France, that U.S. company should be able to obtain the same trademark protection as a French company, subject to clear restrictions, such as . B the fact that the mark is not distinctive or contrary to morality or public order. In addition, there is a trademark application filed by a foreign applicant directly with another country party to the Paris Convention, completely independent of a trademark application that can be filed in the foreign applicant`s country of origin. Article 40 of the TRIPS Agreement recognizes that certain anti-competitive practices or conditions for licensing intellectual property rights have negative effects on trade and may impede the transfer and dissemination of technology (paragraph 1).
Member States may, in accordance with the other provisions of the Agreement, take appropriate measures to prevent or control abusive and anti-competitive licensing practices of intellectual property rights (paragraph 2). The Agreement provides for a mechanism whereby a country wishing to take action against practices involving companies of another Member State may enter into consultations with that other Member State and exchange publicly available non-confidential information on the matter in question and other information at its disposal, subject to national law and conclusion. mutually satisfactory agreements on the preservation of its confidentiality at the request of the Member (paragraph 3). Similarly, a country whose companies are subject to such measures in another Member State may enter into consultations with that Member (paragraph 4). At the Vienna Patent Congress, participating countries agreed that existing patent laws are insufficient for both the inventor and his country of origin. The most important conclusion of the Congress of Vienna was the need to remove existing territorial restrictions on patents. The problem had to move from an isolated solution to a solution through a joint international agreement. This principle therefore prohibits two sets of rules for the protection of industrial property – one for nationals and the other for foreigners. If a Member State does not grant its citizens the protection of industrial property, the Paris Convention provides that it is not obliged to grant the same to foreigners. As in the main existing intellectual property conventions, the fundamental obligation of each member country is to accord the treatment of intellectual property provided for in the convention to persons of other members. Article 1.3 defines who these persons are. Such persons are called nationals, but include natural or legal persons who have close links with other members without necessarily being nationals of them.
The criteria for determining which persons should therefore benefit from the treatment provided for in the Agreement are those set out for that purpose in the main existing WIPO conventions on intellectual property, which are of course applied to all WTO Members, whether or not they are Parties to these Agreements. These conventions are the Paris Convention, the Berne Convention, the International Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations (Rome Convention) and the Treaty on Intellectual Property in Integrated Circuits (IPIC Treaty). .