Articles

• Wadlow, Christopher

Abstract

The rights and remedies of private parties under the three principal global treaties for the protection of intellectual property are restricted to persons having the status of ressortissants under the relevant treaty, and by the general law of diplomatic protection. Two largely neglected issues arise in relation to ressortissants, which the treaties do not expressly resolve. The first concerns whether the obligations which state A assumes towards the nationals of state B can be enforced by states other than B. The second is whether the obligations assumed by a state under one of these treaties extend to that state’s own nationals. It is suggested that the <it>Bananas III</it> and <it>Havana Club</it> decisions have effectively resulted in unlimited locus standi for WTO members to complain of breaches of TRIPs, including the incorporated provisions of the Paris and Berne conventions. The answer to the second question is more tentative, but it is suggested that there may be greater opportunities for arguing that the provisions of TRIPs are binding on states in relation to their own nationals, including incorporated Paris and Berne Articles, than there were under either of those earlier treaties on their own.