In advance of December's much-anticipated World Trade Organization ministerial meeting in Hong Kong, the WTO has given least developed countries (LDCs) an additional seven years to bring their national IP laws into compliance with international TRIPS standards.
This is important, and strategic.
It is widely anticipated that there is no possibility of progress on the major purpose of the WTO ministerial: namely, relief to developing countries by reforming the agriculture subsidy policies of the U.S. and the E.U.
Because no one really expects a breakthrough on agriculture in Hong Kong, the expectation is that the focus will turn to a "secondary" issue in order to justify the meeting and to point to as a success.
Enter the TRIPS (Trade Related aspects of Intellectual Property rights) agreement. Countries that signed TRIPS have to establish IP laws that meet TRIPS standards. Although there are loads of flexibilities, agreeing to TRIPS means that you have to protect intellectual property in some predictable, consistent manner.
The worldwide anti-capitalist, anti-IP movement has been looking for an opportunity to weaken TRIPS protections. They have been planning for months to use the avian flu issue to argue at the WTO that the TRIPS agreement sets up a situation where poor countries cannot possibly protect the health of their citizens while also respecting the intellectual property of companies like Gilead and Roche, which they are required to do under TRIPS (although TRIPS itself allows compulsory licensing of critical medicines in legitimate health emergencies.)
This is why the announcement on the seven-year extension for poor countries to comply with TRIPS is of strategic importance. It takes a lot of the hot air out of the activists’ balloon. It lessens the risk of a disastrous weakening of TRIPS in Hong Kong, and it might even make it more likely that the important matter of agriculture subsidies may remain on the table in Hong Kong long enough for the E.U. to feel the pressure and cave in, which would be the good and right and constructive thing for the E.U. to do.