To facilitate a constructive, ongoing dialogue on critical issues concerning global intellectual property law and policy, the center publishes an Occasional Papers in Intellectual Property Law
series. This series features papers written by the Drake Intellectual Property Law Center faculty, distinguished visitors, and symposium participants.
#1 Peter K. Yu
"Intellectual Property, Economic Development, and the China Puzzle
"Forthcoming as a book chapter, this Paper examines the relationship between intellectual property protection and economic development in China. It begins by exploring the conventional linkage between intellectual property protection and foreign direct investment. It then examines why China expanded its intellectual property protection even though such expansion was unnecessary for attracting foreign direct investment. The Paper concludes by highlighting the country’s regional and sectoral disparities, its inadequate development of an enabling environment for effective intellectual property protection, and its improvements in intellectual property protection at both the microscopic and qualitative levels. It takes the view that a better understanding of the role of intellectual property protection in promoting economic development will help provide a more accurate forecast of when China will reach a crossover point at which it will find stronger intellectual property protection in its self-interests.
#2 Peter K. Yu
"Three Questions That Will Make You Rethink the U.S.-China Intellectual Property Debate
"Reprinted from a written symposium on intellectual property law in China, this provocative Paper argues that the failure to resolve piracy and counterfeiting problems in China can be partly attributed to the lack of political will on the part of U.S. policymakers and the American public to put intellectual property protection at the very top of the U.S.-China agenda. The Paper illustrates the argument by examining three questions that the author has asked when he engages in debate with U.S. scholars and policymakers over intellectual property protection in China. The Paper underscores the policy complexities involved in the U.S.-China intellectual property debate.
#3 Peter K. Yu
"Building Intellectual Property Coalitions for Development
"Commissioned by the EDGE (Emerging Dynamic Global Economies) Network of the University of Ottawa, this Paper begins by explaining how building intellectual property coalitions for development (IPC4D) can help less developed countries strengthen their collective bargaining position, influence negotiation outcomes, and promote effective and democratic decision making in the international intellectual property regime. The Paper then discusses four coordination strategies that can be used to develop these coalitions. It concludes with a discussion of the various challenges confronting the creation and maintenance of these coalitions. olars and policymakers over intellectual property protection in China. The Paper underscores the policy complexities involved in the U.S.-China intellectual property debate.
#4 Peter K. Yu
"The Global Intellectual Property Order and Its Undetermined Future
"Published in the inaugural issue of the new
WIPO Journal, this Paper highlights some of the key recent developments in the intellectual property field. It discusses the increasingly complex and incoherent international legal order governing the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. It also examines the increasingly polarized debate on intellectual property law and policy. The Paper points out that many middle-income developing countries are now approaching a crossover point at which they switch over to the more promising side of the intellectual property divide. This crossover process is likely to have significant implications for the future development of the intellectual property system.
#5 Peter K. Yu
"The U.S.-China Dispute over TRIPS Enforcement
"Forthcoming as a book chapter, this Paper examines the first WTO dispute between China and the United States over the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. It outlines the origin of the United States’ complaint against China and explores the challenges to filing such a complaint. It then discusses the key arguments made by both China and the United States as well as the major findings in the WTO panel report. The Paper concludes by focusing on the remedial actions China has taken to bring its law into conformity with the TRIPS Agreement. It further examines the key lessons for the United States, China, and other less developed countries, as well as intellectual property rights holders in general.
#6 Peter K. Yu
"Enforcement, Economics and Estimates
"Published in the second special issue of
The WIPO Journal, this Paper draws on the latest economic research to show that high intellectual property enforcement standards come with a hefty price tag and difficult trade-offs. It then outlines the challenges in measuring the cross-border economic impact of piracy and counterfeiting. The Paper concludes with an analysis of the various metrics that can be or have been used to develop cross-country comparative analyses. It also suggests new areas researchers can explore in their continuous search for a set of mutually satisfactory metrics that advance the international intellectual property enforcement debate.
#7 Peter K. Yu
"Of ACTA/TPP and SOPA/PIPA
"This Occasional Paper brings together two recently published essays discussing the ongoing efforts to strengthen intellectual property enforcement standards. The first essay was published in
The WIPO Journal as part of a special issue on the politics of intellectual property. It examines the "country club" approach the negotiating parties of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) embraced to establish new and higher international intellectual property enforcement standards. It points out that the agreement is flawed not only because it is a country club agreement, but also because it is a bad country club agreement. The second essay was published in the inaugural issue of
Drake Law Review Discourse. It identifies six different concerns and challenges ACTA poses to U.S. consumers, technology developers, and small and midsize firms. In addition, it explains why the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) is likely to be more dangerous than ACTA from a public interest standpoint. It also explores the challenges recently raised by U.S. legislation, such as the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA).