In 2004, the Intellectual Property Office gave a Taiwanese manufacturer of recordable compact discs compulsory licensing of a patent owned by Dutch company Philips. This brought a protest from the EU, which commissioned a trade barrier probe -- the results of which were made public on Feb. 1.
The report criticized Taiwan's compulsory licensing regulations under the Patent Act as a violation of obligations stipulated by the WTO's Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and indicated that the EU Commission would seek WTO dispute settlement if Taiwan failed to rectify the situation, including amending the Patent Act within two months.
In response, the Ministry of Economic Affairs said that the granting of compulsory licensing of Philips' patent was conducted in accordance with legal procedures and that the associated laws did not conflict with the nation's obligations outlined in TRIPS. If the ministry insists on its stance and the issue is not resolved with the EU, this case could become Taiwan's first full-on WTO dispute since joining the organization in 2002.
The protection of intellectual property rights (IPR) has become internationalized in an age when patents have global reach. International IPR litigation is common and Taiwanese businesses are becoming accustomed to legal action in the courts of various countries.
The adoption of intellectual property rights into WTO regulations was a new phase in the globalization of IPR protection and TRIPS set a minimal international standard. If a WTO member is accused of having violated obligations stipulated under TRIPS, interested parties can seek dispute settlement at the WTO.
Hence, instead of seeking resolution through domestic law, patent owners such as Philips go through the EU. If the case is brought to WTO dispute resolution, the EU will be the plaintiff and Taiwan will have to defend its legislation allowing compulsory licensing.
Because Taiwan is not a member of many world bodies like the UN, legislation mostly reflects the will of domestic legislators. But after joining the WTO, trade-related laws must comply with TRIPS obligations. If the WTO were to decide the compulsory licensing case is in violation of TRIPS, then Taiwan would have to abide by its decision, which normally means amending domestic laws or measures. Not doing so means being subjected to trade sanctions.
Taiwan should actively reinforce its domestic capability to conform to the standards of international IPR protection. With the establishment of TRIPS, IPR legislation has become increasingly important. As Western nations created TRIPS, they are naturally more mature in using the system and their experience has produced rich results.
Taiwan has been in the WTO for six years and has only been a part of the international IPR body for a short time. It must strive to improve its vision of international IPR law.
For instance, the country's understanding of international bodies and their associated regulations, as well as training in international negotiation and litigation skills, should be improved.
To respond to the globalization of IPR, Taiwan needs to train more interdisciplinary professionals, especially lawyers with knowledge of IPR, human rights and environmental law.
Taiwan should also construct a mechanism for sharing experiences between businesses, government, and academia to obtain more rights and benefits for Taiwan, as well as to fulfill our obligations in the international community.
Ni Kuei-jung is an associate professor of law at the Institute of Technology Law at National Chiao Tung University.
Translated by Angela Hong
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with