Optimal global protection

How many years should the exclusivity over new technology (the length of the patent) be? Some will say any amount is too much. Others will say the more the merrier. Some others have found a theoretical optimal from an efficiency point of view, but its practical application into global law is as controverted as the first question. If the burden were shared among the different contributors, as put forward by TRIPS PLUS ULTRA, maybe the answer would be easier to find.

The TRIPS PLUS ULTRA practical implementation, as it could improve the compliance with the system overall, and because it would entail more sacrifice from developing countries, it could fit, for instance, the Nash equilibria described by Grossman and Lai (Grossman, Gene M. and Lai, Edwin L.-C., International Protection of Intellectual Property, May 2004. CESifo Working Paper Series No. 790, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=348105). Some thinkers even distrust the macroeconomic approach to this issue. According this study, nonetheless, cooperative optima could be found with the application of the TRIPS PLUS ULTRA proposal (it could be further refined by determining the level of harmonization –which could be an extra tool to be used if needed, provided a just system like that proposed by TRIPS PLUS ULTRA were established). More analysis is needed.

There are others that believe that the whole macroeconomic approach to the patent issue creates misconceptions, a position which some have defended convincingly. We at Pro Humano Genere, nonetheless and at the very least, want the burden of spurring innovation to be distributed in a proportional manner among contributors. This could pave the way for the optimal level of protection. TRIPS PLUS ULTRA could also open a path to the global patent.