Review of Granted Compulsory Licences
Legislators recognise that exceptions and limitations may be established to help the achievement of the ultimate goal under patent law. However, exceptions and limitations are made to keep the interest balance between the patentee and the public, including the potential competitors of the patentee. Such interest balance would be obtained when patentees are restrained from asserting their exclusive rights against some acts that have no substitution effects on the patented products and, at the same time, are conducive to the disclosure of and access to the patent to enhance the technological development. This inference is supported by Art. 30 of the TRIPS Agreement, after which limited exceptions can be allowed in patent law provided that they “do not unreasonably conflict with a normal exploitation of the patent and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the patent owner, taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties”.
Tripping over trips and the global HIV/AIDS epidemic: legislation and political decisions in Brazil and the United States.
National and international intellectual property rights exist to protect people from stealing ideas creations and products from the creators. These laws also extend to property rights on pharmaceutical treatments and medicines for patients with life-threatening diseases. One example is the treatment for HIV and AIDS a disease that has become a global epidemic. However the intellectual property laws that govern these treatments reduce accessibility and quantity of treatment to those afflicted with HIV or AIDS. Thus the ethical question arises of whether it is moral to withhold needed treatment to protect intellectual property. Furthermore this issue is complicated by the 2011 United Nations declaration to increase access to HIV prevention treatment and care.
The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice ten years on: Successes and future challenges under the Stockholm Programme. CEPS Paperbacks. June 2010
This book celebrates the tenth anniversary of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) by bringing together the views of key practitioners and policy-makers who have played an outstanding role in thinking about and shaping EU policies on freedom, security and justice. 
 
Ten years ago, the member states transferred competences to the EU for law and policy-making in the fields of immigration, asylum and border controls, and began the transfer process for criminal justice and policing. This decade of European cooperation on AFSJ policies has experienced very dynamic convergence, the enactment of a large body of European law and the setting-up of numerous EU agencies working in these domains. Such dynamism in policy-making has not been without challenges and vulnerabilities, however. As this collective volume shows, the main dilemmas that lie ahead relate to an effective (while more plural) institutional framework under the Treaty of Lisbon, stronger judicial scrutiny through a greater role for national courts and the Court of Justice in Luxembourg, better mechanisms for evaluating and monitoring the implementation of EU AFSJ law and a more solid fundamental rights strategy. The contributions in this volume address the progress achieved so far in these policy areas, identify the challenges for future European cooperation in the AFSJ and put forward possible paths for making more progress in the next generation of the EU’s AFSJ.