Hi, I'm Stan Muller, and this is Crash Course Intellectual Property. Today, we're talking
about international intellectual property law, and the first thing I'm gonna tell you
is that there aren't really any international intellectual property rights. IP rights are territorial.
They're created by each country's national law, and typically apply only to conduct that takes place
within that nation. So, there you have it. Thanks for watching, I'll see you next week.
Crash Course Intellectual Property is filmed in the Chad and Stacey Emig--is this really
all we have today? What about the complex web of international IP treaties that establish
minimum standards for IP laws in countries around the world? Can't we talk about that for eleven minutes?
[Theme Music]
So all these international treaties set up ground rules for stuff like how long a copyright
or patent should last, or the basic subject matter of trademarks. Countries that join
these treaties can have higher protection standards, but the treaties set up a baseline
of protection they must provide. The most important minimum standard set up by these
treaties is the principle of national treatment, which operates something like an international
IP golden rule, "Do onto other countries' authors and inventors as you would have done
unto your own." Basically, each country has to give foreigners IP protection that is no
less favorable than the protection granted to its own people.
These international treaties are a response to globalization. Political reforms have torn
down the iron curtain, and trade with half the world that was basically off limits to
the West a few years ago is now possible. China. Legal reforms have facilitated an expanded
economic exchanges, and IP rights play a significant role in all channels of international trade.
Sellers of goods are more likely to sell to a country that has strong IP rights, especially
for products like computer software or films, where the product is basically pure IP. Beyond
this, technological advances mean that someone might be watching this right now in Antarctica
and to that person I say, do you really have the bandwidth in Antarctica to watch Crash Course?
In any case, borders and distance mean less and less in the digitized world. But as we
discussed in CrashCourse World History, globalization is complicated. Some argue that ratcheting
up IP minimum standards, especially in a world where around 90% of all technology royalties
and licensing fees are received by 5 developed countries, is not always a good thing.
Developed and developing nations often have very different attitudes toward intellectual
property. Developed nations usually try to get full economic benefits from their inventions
and knowledge through strong IP rights. They argue that strong IP laws are necessary to
protect the significant investments of developing these products. Pharmaceuticals and feature
films cost a lot to make, and the creators want a return on their investment. Rich countries
also argue that strong intellectual property laws will make developing countries more attractive trade
partners, because creators know their IP exports will be protected, so they're more likely to send stuff there.
Developing nations argue that they need access to advanced technology and knowledge, which
are the tools they need to develop, modernize, and compete in the modern world. They often
view strong IP rights as a tool used to either deny access altogether to technology and knowledge
or to severely limit access via high royalties and licensing fees. So it's an open question
as to who's right about this. Do you happen to know? Don't count on it. Yeah, me either.
So, we've got no answers, but let's take a look at the international frameworks for copyright, patents, and
trademarks. The oldest and most important copyright treaty is the Berne Convention for the Protection
of Literary and Artistic Works. The Berne Convention, as it's known, was first signed
in 1886 in Berne, Switzerland, and was aimed at solving the problem of widely varying treatment
of foreign authors among countries. The United States, for example, didn't grant copyrights
to foreign works until 1891. In his 1842 reading tour of the United States, Charles Dickens
was treated like a rock star, mostly because so many people were reading cheap, pirated
editions of his books. And so the US press attacked him. To quote one outlet, "We are
mortified and grieved that he should have been guilty of such great indelicacy and impropriety,
asking us to do honor to his genius but to look after his purse also." So we steal this
guy's copyrights and then insult him for complaining about it. Welcome to America, Dickens!
This state of affairs continued until 1878, when France convened an international literary
congress with Victor Hugo, author of Les Miserables and The Hunchback of Notre Dame, as its head.
As with all things created by Victor Hugo, it was way too long. The agreement was finally
signed in 1886 by ten countries. Today, there are 168 members of this treaty, which is administered
by the World Intellectual Property Organization, or WIPO.
The United States didn't officially join the Berne Convention until 1989, which also happens
to be the year that the cinema classic and highly lucrative intellectual property Weekend
at Bernie's was released. Is that a coincidence? Mmm... maybe.
The Berne Convention adopts the aforementioned principle of national treatment and sets up
certain minimum standards for the copyright laws of any country that signs on. Things
like minimum copyright terms and the scope of exceptions and limitations to exclusive rights.
The treaty also largely eliminates what are called "formalities". Berne countries can't
require that authors go through formalities like copyright registration or require a copyright
notice or symbol to get protection. But without requirements, the owners register their works
and record ownership transfers with their particular government, ownership information
is often lost and authors can't be located. This creates a lot of problems.
Another problem with the Berne Convention is that it doesn't have an effective enforcement
system. When a country violates the treaty, there's no effective way to punish them for
it. Members do have the option of trying to settle the dispute through the International
Court of Justice, but this option has been used exactly 0 times. A lot of these issues
were "resolved" by the trade related aspects of intellectual property rights, or TRIPS Agreement.
Formed in 1994, this agreement incorporates most of the Berne Convention and adds a few
copyright bits of its own. The TRIPS agreement is administered by the World Trade Organization,
and it has a strong enforcement mechanism in place under the WTO's dispute settlement
body. So if a country doesn't comply, the WTO's like, "WTF!" They then decide whether
there's a violation and what kind of punishment they need to impart.
Beyond the Berne Convention and TRIPS, the World Intellectual Property Organization produced
two multi-lateral treaties: the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty.
These are referred to as the "Internet treaties" and the US implemented them in 1998 through its
introduction of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act or the DMCA which you, as an Internet user, probably hate.
International copyright is enormously complex. Luckily, international patent law is dead simple.
Nah, it's enormously complex too. Let's go to the Thought Bubble.
As the industrial revolution advanced across Europe and North America, differences in countries'
patent laws piqued an interest in creating international standards for patents. The International
Convention for the Protection of Intellectual Property, commonly known as the Paris Convention,
was signed in 1883. In Paris, France. Like the Berne Convention, the Paris Convention
lacks an adequate enforcement mechanism. If a country violates the treaty, everybody's
back in the International Court of Justice. But, just as with copyrights, nobody does this.
Because the Paris Convention didn't really set minimum standards, countries had great
freedom to tailor their patent laws to their own needs and interests. Developing countries,
for example, might exclude pharmaceutical products from patentability because they feel
like health-related products and medicine should be affordable for people to buy. Many
developed nations successfully sought to close this gap during negotiations of our old frenemy,
the TRIPS Agreement. TRIPS incorporates parts of the Paris Convention and sets forth a number
of minimum standards for patent protection. TRIPS prevents World Trade Organization members
from denying patents to pharmaceuticals or biotechnology products or processes.
Unlike the Berne Convention, which does away with copyright formalities, the Paris Convention
assumes that the inventor has to apply to his or her particular government's patent
office or government. Countries that are party to the convention can't give foreign inventors
a hard time. They get the same protections that apply to domestic inventors. The Patent
Cooperation Treaty makes this easier. It helps coordinate procedures for filing multiple
patent applications for the same invention in several countries around the world.
Thanks, Thought Bubble.
So, the Paris Convention also governs trademarks. In many ways, it treats trademarks like patents.
It requires countries to provide for national treatment. Because trademark law is territorial
and you have to apply for protection in each country where use is planned, there are two
special agreements that establish a common international registration system. These are
the 1891 Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks and the 1989 Madrid
Protocol for Relating to the Madrid Agreement.
Aside from all these European capitals and their agreements and conventions and protocols,
the TRIPS Agreement extends protection to geographical indications. This means that
the word "Champagne" can only be used for sparkling wine produced in France's Champagne
region. It also extends to words like Bordeaux, Chablis, Parma ham, Roquefort cheese, Florida
orange juice, Vermont white cheddar, all that business.
These issues have been a point of contention between the US and the EU. Europe has long
pushed for greater protection of geographical indications. Every time you eat Greek yogurt
or Feta cheese, every time you smoke a Cuban cigar, every time you stir up a cup of Swiss
Miss hot chocolate, every time you're confounded by a Chinese finger trap, you're seeing a
potential geographical indication violation.
At the end of the day, international intellectual property is all about setting minimum standards
and national treatment. It's about countries treating the nationals of other countries
at least as well as they treat their own.
This push for standardization has caused some problems. There are now so many IP treaties
and agreements and protocols in place that it makes intellectual property reform difficult.
So, for example, changing the law to reduce the copyright term in the United States isn't
just a matter of changing the US law. It's a matter of changing all of these international agreements.
Just as individual nations struggle to keep pace with our increasingly globalized world,
so does the international intellectual property system. Both national and international
systems are struggling to find the right balance of exclusive rights and public access to knowledge
in a world where borders are traversed with a click.
Thanks for watching. We'll see you next week.
CrashCourse Intellectual Property is filmed in the Chad and Stacey Emigholz Studio in
beautiful Indianapolis, Indiana, and is made by this crew of international creators. If
you'd like to keep CrashCourse free for everyone forever, you can support the series at Patreon,
a crowdfunding platform that allows you to support the content you love. Speaking of
Patreon, we'd like to thank all of our patrons in general and we'd like specifically thank
our Headmaster of Learning, Thomas Frank, and our Vice Principals, Kathy and Tim Philip
and Linnea Boyev. We've got awesome rewards at our Patreon page, but the greatest reward
of all is helping people learn stuff, right? Thanks for watching. We'll see you next week.