ACTA, 과연 국제무역을 위해 필요한 제도인가? : ACTA와 TRIPS의 비교를 중심으로

Abstract

The protection of intellectual property demands uniform protection from an international perspective due to its feature of intangibility and then, lots of international conventions have been born. Despite that, it is not easy to make the convention where all major countries on intellectual property enter. Accordingly, at the beginning, TRIPS was welcome by all countries as a means to provide uniform protection of intellectual property in the world. However, developed countries have considered TRIPS as a failed measure for protection of intellectual property in balancing interests between developed countries and less developed countries with time. That is why ACTA was born. ACTA provides stronger enforcement measures including criminal enforcement and border measures than TRIPS. ACTA excluded less developed countries during the negotiating process and then such stronger enforcement measures in ACTA may target potential infringers in less developed countries. Thus, ACTA will worsen the economies of less developed countries with export controls and limit the access to goods incorporating intellectual property including generic medicines. These may threaten public health and life of people in less developed countries. Moreover, ACTA may also endanger online users' privacy and personal information in developed countries. The level of protection on intellectual property must be decided balancing interests of right owners and ones of users. However, the recent trend of amendment tilts in favor of right owners while strong protection of right owners does not guarantee quantitative economic growth but has the possibility to degrade quality of life. Therefore, as one of signatories of ACTA, in my opinion, it is time for Korea to review the posture on intellectual property protection considering maximum public welfare for world.