22011518

Question 1
Intellectual Property Right is an ever- growing aspect of international law, considering the
speedy advancement of Technology. The tentacles of Intellectual Property rights are spread
across trade and laws all over the world. (Anand, 2019.) Harmonization of international
intellectual property laws is deemed as a necessity because inventions can happen anywhere, but
when you get a patent for one, it's only protected in the country where you got the patent.
Nowadays, with more and more trade happening between countries, and because of the
development in transportation and communication, it is important to for a global framework.
(MOHANTY, 2008.)
Harmonizing laws aims to simplify international trade by making it easier to protect Intellectual
Property Rights (IP) worldwide, reducing costs and promoting economic growth. It facilitates
the exchange of knowledge, encourages creativity, and fosters cultural exchange. While creators
can seek protection for their work in foreign countries, monitoring infringement globally is
challenging and costly. Some experts propose a universal database for trademarks and patents,
but it may raise registration costs despite its potential benefits. (Amand, 2019)
These reasons posed as the motivation behind the Paris Convention of 1883 and the Berne
Convention of 1886 represent. These Conventions posed as milestones in the global endeavor to
establish standardized protocols for the protection of intellectual property rights. They facilitated
international cooperation by instituting procedural frameworks for the recognition and
enforcement of patents and trademarks across participating nations. However, it is crucial to note
that these conventions primarily address procedural aspects of intellectual property (IP)
protection, rather than establishing uniform substantive laws governing the scope and criteria for
IP rights. Consequently, individuals or entities seeking IP protection in multiple jurisdictions
must navigate the distinct legal requirements and regulations of each country independently.
( Nakagawa, 2000.)
Regional agreements, such as those within the European Union, however, emerged to streamline
the process of patent protection within specific geographic areas. The World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO), on the other hand, serves as a central authority for coordinating
international efforts to harmonize IP regulations, building upon the foundations established by
the Paris and Berne Conventions. Furthermore, the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement, incorporated into the broader framework of the Uruguay
Round of GATT, plays a pivotal role in shaping the global landscape of IP regulation by
influencing the development of national and international IP laws (Blakely, 2000.)
The WTO's TRIPS Agreement, established during the 1986-94 Uruguay Round, introduced
international rules for intellectual property into the global trading system for the first time. It
acknowledges the increasing significance of intellectual property in trade and aims to harmonize
the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights worldwide. “Intellectual property”
refers to creations of the mind, like inventions, designs, and artistic works, which governments
grant creators rights to prevent others from using without permission. The TRIPS Agreement sets
minimum standards for protecting and enforcing these rights among WTO member countries,
while allowing flexibility for governments to adapt their approaches to suit their domestic needs
and policy objectives. The agreement covers areas such as basic principles of trade, minimum
standards for IP protection, enforcement procedures, dispute settlement mechanisms, and
transitional arrangements for implementation. Overall, it aims to bring more order and
22011518

predictability to international trade and resolve disputes systematically. (WTO

[Link] )
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) stands as a cornerstone of global
cooperation in the protection and promotion of intellectual property (IP) rights. Established in
1967 and later recognized as a specialized agency of the United Nations in 1974, WIPO boasts a
membership comprising over 180 countries worldwide. From its headquarters in Geneva, WIPO
spearheads initiatives aimed at fostering innovation, creativity, and economic development while
safeguarding the rights of creators and innovators across various domains, including music,
literature, inventions, and trademarks. (Gurry, 2011.)
WIPO’s multifaceted approach revolves around three core pillars. Firstly, the organization
actively engages in the progressive development of global IP laws, crafting international treaties
and standards that establish common frameworks for IP protection and enforcement. Through
capacity-building initiatives and technical assistance programs, WIPO supports developing
nations in enhancing their IP infrastructure, empowering them to harness the potential of IP as a
driver of economic growth. Concurrently, WIPO offers a suite of services and resources to the
private sector, facilitating the registration of trademarks and patents while providing guidance on
IP management strategies. Through these efforts, WIPO endeavors to foster a balanced and
inclusive IP ecosystem that promotes innovation, fosters technological advancement, and ensures
equitable access to knowledge and creativity on a global scale. (Gurry, 2011.)
The tensions surrounding intellectual property rights (IPR) between developed and developing
nations underscore a fundamental struggle between promoting innovation and ensuring equitable
access to essential goods and services. Developed nations typically advocate for robust IPR
protection to incentivize innovation and reward creators and innovators. However, this stance can
pose challenges for developing countries, where high costs associated with patented technologies
may impede access to crucial products like medicines and agricultural technologies. As a result,
developing nations often push for flexibilities in IPR regimes, seeking exemptions or compulsory
licensing to address public health needs and foster local innovation. (Ezel & Cory 2019.)
Harmonization of IPR laws seeks to establish uniform standards and streamline international
trade, but it also risks exacerbating existing disparities. While harmonization can enhance legal
certainty and facilitate technology transfer by creating common frameworks for patent
recognition and enforcement, its impact on access to essential goods and services remains
complex. Developing nations, with limited resources and infrastructure, may struggle to fully
participate in or benefit from harmonization efforts, potentially widening the gap between
developed and developing countries. Moreover, harmonization must strike a delicate balance
between protecting IPR and ensuring access to necessities, requiring careful consideration of the
diverse needs and priorities of different nations.
Ultimately, the effectiveness of harmonization in fostering global innovation, technology
transfer, and access to essential goods and services depends on its ability to address the
competing interests of developed and developing nations. A comprehensive approach to
harmonization should prioritize mechanisms that promote equitable access to essential
technologies, support sustainable development goals, and accommodate the unique challenges
faced by developing countries. By incorporating flexibilities and safeguards into harmonization
efforts, policymakers can work towards creating a more inclusive and balanced global innovation
ecosystem that benefits all stakeholders.
22011518

Reference
 JUNGI NAKAGAWA, HARMONIZATION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
RIGHTS, DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199604661.003.0005;
 Timothy W. Blakely: Trade Mark as a Model of Unitary transnational Trademark
Protection, 149 [Link].309 (2000).
 [Link] (accessed on
8/2/2024)
 WIPO OVERVIEW : [Link] (accessed on 8/2/2024)
 The Way Forward for Intellectual Property Internationally By Stephen Ezell and Nigel
Cory April 25, 2019 ([Link]
property-internationally/)
22011518

Question 2
Passing off is a common law principle that protects the goodwill and reputation associated with a
particular business or product. It prohibits others from misrepresenting their goods or services in
a way that may cause confusion or deception among consumers. In Ghana, passing off has been
recognized as a legal remedy to protect against unfair competition and trademark infringement
(ERIC AMANKWAH V. AHOMKA BEVERAGES LIMITED (2019) JELR 65510 (HC).
To establish a claim of passing off, the following elements must be proven:
1. Goodwill or reputation the claimant must demonstrate that they have built up a reputation or
goodwill in connection with their goods or services.
2. Misrepresentation: The Defendant must have made a false representation that is likely to
deceive or confuse consumers into believing that their goods or services are associated with the
claimant.
3. Damage: The claimant must show that they have suffered or are likely to suffer damage as a
result of the defendant’s misrepresentation. It is important to note that passing off is not
applicable to spiritual pursuits or matters of conscience and worship, as it is primarily concerned
with regulating trading and commerce. (PROPHETESS THANE II V. PROPHET GEORGE
(1977) JELR 66571 (CA)
In cases where passing off is established, the court may grant remedies such as injunctions to
restrain the defendant from continuing the infringing activities, damages to compensate the
claimant for any losses suffered, and costs to cover the legal expenses incurred. (PRG WATCH
MANUFACTURING LIMITED V. JOSEPH ATTAKORA (2013) JELR 67185 (HC)
In the context of the given scenario, XYZ Corp may have a valid claim against ABC Ltd for
passing off. The similarity in the name "EnergyGlow" to "EnerGlo,' along with the similar logo
and packaging, could lead to a likelihood of confusion among consumers. This could potentially
harm the goodwill and reputation that XYZ Corp has built over the years. The striking similarity
in the branding could also be seen as a form of misrepresentation, as it may lead consumers to
believe that "EnergyGlow" is associated with "EnerGlo" when it is not. Therefore, XYZ Corp's
claim of passing off against ABC Ltd appears to be valid, considering the potential impact on
goodwill, misrepresentation, and the likelihood of confusion.
Reference
 (ERIC AMANKWAH V. AHOMKA BEVERAGES LIMITED (2019) JELR 65510
(HC)
 PROPHETESS THANE II V. PROPHET GEORGE (1977) JELR 66571 (CA)
 PRG WATCH MANUFACTURING LIMITED V. JOSEPH ATTAKORA (2013) JELR
67185 (HC)
22011518

Question 3
Emerging technologies such as Al, biotechnology, and genomics have significant implications for
the interplay between intellectual property and human rights. These advancements challenge
traditional frameworks and may affect rights such as privacy and autonomy. For instance. export
controls are being considered to prevent the misuse of technologies that can infringe on human
rights, such as those used for surveillance and political control.(OECD 2002)i
Additionally, the rapid development of digital technologies requires the reconsideration of ethical
and legal concepts, making it challenging to codify standards and ensure that these technologies
do not prejudice human rights.( Yeung, 2019.)ii From an intellectual property perspective, there is
a growing recognition of the need to balance the moral and economic rights of creators and
inventors with the wider interests and needs of society, as well as to promote scientific progress
and access to its benefits in a manner that benefits individuals at large.
The implications of emerging technologies on the interplay between intellectual property and
human rights are significant export controls and the need to reconsider ethical and legal concepts
in the context of digital technologies reflect the growing awareness of the potential impact of
these advancements on human rights ( Stahl, Brooks, Hatzakis , Santiago, and Wright, 2023.) iii
Balancing the rights of creators and inventors with the wider interests of society, as well as
ensuring that intellectual property rights promote scientific progress and access to its benefits,
are key considerations in this evolving landscape.
Advancements in AI, for instance, are revolutionizing decision-making processes in various
sectors, from finance to criminal justice (Bulathgama, 2023) iv. While AI technologies hold
promise for efficiency and accuracy, they also raise concerns about transparency, accountability,
and bias.( Ferrara, 2023.)v For example, algorithms used in hiring processes or loan approvals
may inadvertently discriminate against certain groups, infringing on individuals’ rights to fair
treatment and non-discrimination . Similarly, biotechnological innovations like gene editing and
synthetic biology have the potential to transform healthcare and agriculture (National Academies
of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2016)vi. However, they also raise ethical questions about
the ownership and control of genetic information, as well as the potential for misuse or
exploitation.( Andrews, Fullarton, Holtzman, 1994.) vii These issues highlight the delicate balance
between promoting innovation and protecting human rights in the context of emerging
technologies.
To tackle these challenges, policymakers and stakeholders need to take a comprehensive
approach that looks beyond just the economic gains from intellectual property (IP) protections.
They must also consider the ethical, social, and legal impacts of these protections (Ezel & Cory,
22011518

2019). It's crucial that IP frameworks prioritize transparency, accountability, and inclusivity to
protect individuals' rights and advance the public interest. For instance, initiatives promoting
open access to research findings and collaborative research efforts can maximize the benefits of
scientific breakthroughs while making sure everyone can benefit. Moreover, there's a need for
oversight and regulations to address potential risks like data breaches, discrimination, and
privacy violations associated with new technologies.
Navigating the relationship between intellectual property and human rights requires a strong
commitment to upholding fundamental rights and values (World Health Organization). This
involves ongoing dialogue and collaboration among policymakers, researchers, civil society
groups, and businesses. Together, they can develop policies and practices that encourage
innovation while respecting human dignity and autonomy. By adopting an approach that
prioritizes human rights in intellectual property matters, we can ensure that emerging
technologies contribute to a fairer and more equitable society.
Reference
 GENETIC INVENTIONS, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND
 LICENSING PRACTICES EVIDENCE AND POLICIES ORGANISATION FOR
ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (2002)
 DGI(2019)05 ‘A study of the implications of advanced digital technologies (including
AI systems) for the concept of responsibility within a human rights framework.
Rapporteur: Karen Yeung
 Bernd Carsten Stahl a d, Laurence Brooks b d, Tally Hatzakis c, Nicole Santiago c,
David Wright c Exploring ethics and human rights in artificial intelligence – A Delphi
study (Volume 191, June 2023, 122502). Available at
[Link] .
 THUSITHA BULATHGAMA; OCTOBER 26, 2023: Artificial Intelligence: The New
Way of Solving Crimes.
 Ferrara, E. (2023). Fairness And Bias in Artificial Intelligence: A Brief Survey of
Sources, Impacts, And Mitigation Strategies.
 [Link]
experiences-and-prospects-new-report
 Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Assessing Genetic Risks; Andrews LB,
Fullarton JE, Holtzman NA, et al., editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press
(US); 1994.
i
GENETIC INVENTIONS, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND
LICENSING PRACTICES EVIDENCE AND POLICIES ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION
AND DEVELOPMENT (2002)
ii
DGI(2019)05 ‘A study of the implications of advanced digital technologies (including AI systems)
for the concept of responsibility within a human rights framework. Rapporteur: Karen Yeung
iii
Bernd Carsten Stahl a d, Laurence Brooks b d, Tally Hatzakis c, Nicole Santiago c, David Wright c
Exploring ethics and human rights in artificial intelligence – A Delphi study (Volume 191, June
2023, 122502). Available at [Link] .
iv
THUSITHA BULATHGAMA; OCTOBER 26, 2023: Artificial Intelligence: The New Way of Solving
Crimes.
v
Ferrara, E. (2023). Fairness And Bias in Artificial Intelligence: A Brief Survey of Sources, Impacts,
And Mitigation Strategies.
vi
[Link]
prospects-new-report
vii
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Assessing Genetic Risks; Andrews LB, Fullarton JE,
Holtzman NA, et al., editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 1994.