Economic and Legal Aspects of Patent System: Approaching of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar

Author(s)

Pyae Phyo Hlaing , Khin Kyi Tun , Khin Thandar Soe , Aung Myat Thu , Chit Aye Aye Kyi ,

Download Full PDF Pages: 14-21 | Views: 604 | Downloads: 207 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4978879

Volume 9 - September 2020 (09)

Abstract

In order to implement the TRIPS’ agreement, the Republic of the Union of Myanmar has been drafting IPR law. Apart from this, the law concerning patent rights is one of the great importance under TRIPS. Pros and cons centered from the economic view for having patent rights are discussed. The paper further discusses the consideration of granting patent rights. If the statutory provisions cannot cover how to grant this right, being there has been no decided case on the patent right in Myanmar, cases either from the European Union or from the United States should be studied because these two communities have been popular in dealing with patent issues. This paper views that the Republic of the Union of Myanmar is on the right path to having the consolidated intellectual property law that includes Patent Law in the new version.

Keywords

Intellectual Property, Patent, and Myanmar Patent

References

  1. European Community Treaty (ECT), 1956
  2. European Patent Convention (EPC), 1973
  3. Paris Convention, 1886
  4. Patent Co-operation Treaty (PCT), 1970
  5. Rome Convention, 1961
  6. Berne Convention, 1971
  7. Trade Related Aspect of Intellectual Property Rights, 1994
  8. German Patents Act, 1998
  9. India Patent and Designs Act, 1911
  10. Myanmar Patents and Designs Act, 1945
  11. Myanmar Patents and Designs (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1945
  12. United States Code Title 35 (35 U.S.C.)
  13. Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly, [2011] UKSC 51, Supreme Court of 2 November 2011.
  14. Symbian Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents, [2008] EWCA Civ 1066, Court of Appeal of 8 October 2008.
  15. Diamond, Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303; 100 S. Ct. 2204.
  16. Diamond, Commissioner of Patents And Trademarks v. Diehr et.al, 450 U.S. 175; 101 S. Ct. 1048.
  17. Burk, Dan L. and Lemley, Mark A., The Patent Crisis and How the Courts can Solve It, (The University of Chicago Press, 2009).
  18. Burge, David A., Patent and Trademark Tactics and Practice, 3rd edit., (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1999).
  19. Fink, Carsten and Maskus, Keith E, (Eds.), Intellectual Property and Development: Lessons from Recent Economic Research (the World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2005.
  20. Guellec, Dominique and Potterie, Bruno van, The Economics of the European Patent System, (Oxford University Press Inc., New York, 2007).
  21. Heath, Christopher and Kamperman, Anselm, (Eds.), Intellectual Property and Free Trade Agreements, (Hart Publishing, Oxford and Portland, Oregon, 2007.
  22. U Kyaw Nyunt, Protection of Intellectual Property: Socio–Economic Benefits of Intellectual Protection in Developing Countries (Pyi Zone Publishing House, 2008).
  23. OECD, OECD Patent Statistics Manual, (OECD Pub. 2009). Retrieved March 2, 2011 from www.oecd.org/publishing/corrigenda.
  24. U Than Maung, Legal Articles on Intellectual Property Rights, (Sate Kuu Cho Cho Anupanyarr, 2nd ed. 2008).
  25. WIPO, WIPO Patent Information Services for the Developing Country (WIPO Publication No.493 E). Available at www.wipo_pub_493.pdf.

Cite this Article: