Our services cover countries of three regional unions,
in addition to some countries in the Middle East and North Africa as indicated
in the list of countries covered by our services. The three regional unions
are: First, the African Regional Industrial Property Organization (ARIPO)
which is composed of the following fifteen member states namely, Botswana,
Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Sudan, Swaziland,
Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Second, the African Intellectual
Property Organization (OAPI) which is composed of sixteen member states
namely, Cameroon, Benin, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Congo,
Ivory Coast, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal,
Chad, Togo and Equatoria Guinea. Third, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)
states namely, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain,
Qatar, and Oman. Countries of the Middle East and North Africa which are
covered by our services are: Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Iraq, Iran,
Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, and Yemen as indicated
in the list of countries.
Our firm is in a position to offer direct, efficient services in the identified
regional intellectual property unions and countries. Equipped with capability
to cooperate with our overseas group of associate attorneys, coupled with
an understanding of the legal systems of the Middle East and Africa, and
familiarity with traditions and awareness of the points where they differ,
our firm is in a position to offer direct, efficient services in the identified
regional intellectual property unions and countries.
It is in order to indicate that the countries covered by our services fall
within the categories identified by WTO Agreement on Trade Related Intellectual
Property Rights (TRIPS) as developing i.e. transition economies and least
developed countries (LDCs). These countries were allowed transition periods
to bring their legislations in line with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.
The changes required in domestic legal systems embrace the expansion of
intellectual property protection as to cover protection in new areas such
as biotechnology, integrated circuits, music and computer programs where
computer software bootlegging is likely to occur.
The intensification of enforcement means is challenging. This may be attributed
to a number of reasons such as resource allocation, insufficiency of institutional
capacity, lack of ample special and differential treatment provisions in
the TRIPS as regards the minimum rules for IPR protection, lack of legally
binding rules as regards commitments by developed countries to sponsor technology
transfer and technical and financial assistance to developing and LDCs,
rudimentary comprehension of IPR at least among a subset of developing and
LDCs, and the comparatively small size of the market. This implies that
the balance of cost and benefit of IPR is likely to differ among countries
at different stages of development and here the question of political will
is likely to interpose, however, international agreements have direct consequences
on nations that are signatories to such agreements. Countries falling short
to comply with the TRIPS standards would be susceptible to trade retaliation,
if the dispute settlement system of the WTO has resolved the persistence
of a case of non-compliance with the TRIPS Agreement.
The transition periods which are still remaining are those exceptions granted
to LDCs. These exceptions are envisaged to be met by 2006 to the effect
that LDCs are expected to provide patent protection in all areas of technology.
However, by virtue of the Declaration of the fourth WTO Ministerial Conference
in Doha, Qatar of 9-13 November 2001 under the "Declaration on TRIPS
and Public Health", LDCs were given a further extension to 2016 to
implement the TRIPS provisions on pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemical
protection. Yet, LDCs countries must accept filing of patent applications
on the basis of what is called the "Mailbox provision", however
decisions as regards grants may be delayed until expiry of the transition
period or any extension thereof. The procedure aims at maintaining the novelty
of drugs that may be invented between 1995 and the end of the transition
period. Patent applications must be stocked up until the transition period
expires. After expiry of the period, mailbox applications will be examined
according to TRIPS standards; and in the event of grant the patent term
which begins from the date of filing, will last for what remains of the
20 years. Accordingly, copies of patented drugs will stay in the market,
nevertheless it would not be feasible to manufacture and market copies of
new patented medicines in any country, unless the owner elects not to take
any patent protection in that country.
