Open Access Research Article
SETTING THE BLOCKS FOR ASEAN: HOW IP INJECTION CAN INCREASE THE FRUITFULNESS OF AEC AND ITS GOAL OF 2025
Published Paper
Article Details
SETTING THE BLOCKS FOR ASEAN: HOW
IP INJECTION CAN INCREASE THE FRUITFULNESS OF AEC AND ITS GOAL OF 2025
AUTHORED BY - ABHISHEK SHARMA,
ANNANY MAMGAIN & ARYAN GARG
Abstract
“Economic
growth without investment in human development is unsustainable and unethical”
Amartya
Sen
Starting from the word Human
Development in the above quote, the theory remains unchallenged that even if we
want to build a skyscraper, we have to start with a brick. Moreover, the bricks
for the countries are their individuals. Also Humans are better known for their
intellectual superiority. Individuals in every era of civilizations grew with
the help of their intellect, and hence with the rising population, it becomes
the necessity of time to protect the human intellect and its development.
In this Research Article, thematic analysis and content analysis are
used as a research methodology to find out how the development of Intellectual property
and related policies help in developing a particular Nation or region and how
the same can be used to push The developments in ASEAN. This question is
answered by analyzing the developed countries and related stats. The paper
addresses ASEAN members individually as well, to highlight certain Problems
which are country-specific.
As the paper starts from setting a background of Why IP is an
important pillar of economic growth, it elaborates on the case of ASEAN and its
previous commitments as a group. The research finds out the faults which were
left unattended by ASEAN Nations on front of Intellectual property rights. This
further contributed to the failure of ASEAN Economic cooperation Goals. Now As ASEAN Has set a new Goal namely ASEAN
Economic Cooperation (AEC) Blueprint 2025 A consolidated strategic action plan
(CSAP). This article suggests ways to boost up results of that goals using
IPR development in Post corona crisis and suggests visionary reforms to emerge
as IP Hub of ASIA Pacific Region
Keywords: ASEAN, CSAP, AEC Blueprint, IP (Intellectual property)
Introduction
A gathering of five countries with a common dream of peace:
this was how the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, began 53
years ago on August 8, 1967, in Bangkok, Thailand. When the world was
witnessing the whammy of World War II and the conflict of bipolar world was
seen as future, in that cloud of uncertainty across the world, ASEAN
established a path of collaboration to secure its future[1]. At that point, the total
GDP of ASEAN was just 23.7 Billion (USD), institutions of governance were still
evolving and infrastructure was under development. The birth of ASEAN was
indeed a moment, born out of the courage and foresight of the region’s leaders[2]. The ASEAN with a constant
pace grew with adding up of new member states and formed a much required ASEAN
Economic Community (AEC) on 31 December 2015. The Member of AEC had by then
grown to a population of 629 million with a combined GDP of some USD 2.4
trillion, making it the sixth largest economy in the world and the third
largest in Asia[3].
In 2015, ASEAN trade also rose to USD 2.3 trillion, the fourth largest share in
the world after China, the United States and Germany. Meanwhile, foreign direct
investment totaled USD 121 billion, accounting for 7 percent of global inflows.
It gave clear indications of ASEAN’s Potential to grow. To enhance the growth
of AEC, a Consolidated Strategic Action Plan was prepared[4]. And a AEC blueprint was created to Set and achieve
certain goals with a deadline of 2025. This article concludes with answering the question,
how that pace of achieving CSAP- AEC Goal of 2025 can fastened by giving a push
to Intellectual property rights.
Two years since the CSAP (Consolidated Strategic Action Plan)
to implement the AEC (ASEAN Economic Community) Blueprint 2025 was agreed, more
than 40% of the total 647 action points have been partially fulfilled[5]. Of these, 17.7% have been
completely achieved. ASEAN adopted the AEC Blueprint 2025. It (Blueprint)
consisted of five pillars: a highly integrated and cohesive economy; competitive,
innovative, and dynamic ASEAN; an ASEAN with enhanced economic connectivity and
deeper sectoral cooperation; a resilient, inclusive, and people-oriented ASEAN;
and a global ASEAN. Among those pre-decided 5 pillars, the 2nd pillar of AEC
Blueprint, termed as innovation, required a massive development in intellectual
property rights.
Development of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) in ASEAN,
despite the progress made, has not lifted most ASEAN Member States’ performance
on a larger scale. With the exception of Singapore and Malaysia, implementation
in the other countries has been inconsistent, including allowing some extent of
infringement of patents through the issuance of compulsory licenses. The new
AEC Blueprint 2025 is much more comprehensive in terms of the strategic
measures to promote IP protection[6], but this must be
supported by stronger cooperation among member states and with international
partners, with more serious compliance by the relevant authorities. [7]
Chapterization: This article is divided into 5 chapters which step by step
explains the following: In the very first chapter it is briefed that why IP is a
Important aspect for economic development, and how Intellectual property has
played a key role in almost every strong economy in the world and at end it
claims that with the growing Digitalization, IP is becoming driving wheel of
economy. Second chapter justifies the claims that why ASEAN is a potential bidder
of future IP development and how its AEC 2025 goals need a specific attention
on Intellectual property and related aspects. Third chapter only highlights the
current situation of ASEAN Members by highlighting their individual aspects
related to intellectual property. Fourth chapter discusses the problems, which
need to be resolved if ASEAN wants AEC 2025 goal to become a reality[8]. Fifth and the final
chapter conclude by arguing in the favor ASEAN as future Hub of IP industries
and suggest ways that can be implemented in AEC 2025 Blueprint for taking an
edge in post corona world in fields related to Intellectual property.
NOTE: Every chapter indicates a reading outcome in its very
first line.
1. Intellectual properties
& Development
Outcome: This chapter
will answer. Do IPR really help in economic development? If yes which Industry
in ASEAN will it affect maximum.
What do inventions, business methods, industrial process,
novels, songs, painting, etc have in common? …. It Is that they all results
from production of information (or knowledge)[9].
The question of how (IPR) Intellectual property rights
influence the insight of market development[10] and growth is complex and
based on multiple factors. The effectiveness of Intellectual property rights in
this regard depends considerably on specific conditions in each Nation. If we
talk about individual nations of ASEAN it will be discussed in chapter 3. For
now if we figure out some sectors which directly gets benefits of Intellectual
property rights. So we get the following list[11].
1)
Agribusiness [12]
2)
Clean tech
3)
Pharmaceuticals
4)
Life Science & Bio
Technology
5)
Material Science &
Chemical Engineering
6)
Fin tech & med tech
7)
Mining & Resources and
consumer products (Design Oriented).
Let us take an example of the United States. Below are some
bullet points which provides more concrete support to the argument that, If
ASEAN Want to achieve its economic goals it is bound to improve Intellectual
Property Rights[13].
- Intellectual property(IP)-intensive industries
employ over 55 million Americans, and hundreds of millions of people
Across the world.
- Employment in IP-intensive industries are
expected to grow faster over the next decade than the national average of
United States.
- The average employee in an IP-intensive offices
earned about 30% more than his counterpart in a non-IP related workforce
- The average salary in IP-intensive industries in
United States pay $50,576 per worker compared to the national average of
$38,768.
- America’s IP is worth $5.8 trillion, more than
the nominal GDP of any other country across the world
- IP-intensive industries account for over 1/3– or
38%– of total United States Gross Domestic Product.
- These industries also have 72.5% higher output
per worker than the national average, valued at $136,556 per worker.
- IP related industries accounts for 74% of all
U.S. exports- which amounts to more than $1 trillion.
- The direct and indirect economic impacts of
innovation are extreme, acounting for more than 40% of U.S. economic
growth and employment.
Once we go through the above 2 list it clearly answers that
not only ASEAN but any country aiming for Economic progress is bound to
consider Intellectual property rights as an important Issue. Above example is
just one China, EU and many more economic setups have similar figure regarding
Intellectual property industries. Hence it can be concluded that if ASEAN want
to Achieve the AEC 2025 Goals than it has to improve its IPR infrastructure[14]. Otherwise this time also
it will be short of achieving the goals like earlier 2 times. Also among the
industries mentioned in the above list fin tech, clean tech [15]and med tech are bound to
grow drastically which also demands the digital infrastructure (Again a IP
dependent Industry).[16]
2.
The case of ASEAN & Its AEC Goals
Outcome: This chapter
will throw light on the current situation of ASEAN in reference to global
situation and some brief about ASEAN economic community goals. Also points made
in this chapter will be support the argument of the paper “That ASEAN is a
future bidder of Global Markets related to IP.
ASEAN's
main motive, mentioned in the Bangkok Declaration (founding document), is to
accelerate economic growth, social progress, and cultural development among the
members states. Despite the declaration's specific emphasis on economic and
social cooperation[17],
however, ASEAN's most activities until the end of the Cold War were directed
toward stabilizing the region by "preventing the Balkanization of
Southeast Asia". In fact, for most ASEAN members, economic cooperation was
a means to achieving political cooperation. Hence, the political will to
integrate national markets at the regional level was largely absent until the
early 1990. In result of this MNC’s and other global giants were not much
attracted [18]towards
this region but due to its diverse market and a strategic location the
perspective of companies started changing post 2003.
The
most positive point which initiated the global turn towards ASEAN was increase
in Demand due its diverse market and its location within the reach of India and
China the billion dollar markets[19].
Also the US-China trade war made companies think to find a more neutral and a
stable working place. Hence the opportunities for ASEAN grew more and more.
This situation is currently in the upward going graph and opportunities for
ASEAN are growing Day by day and a push is given by The Corona poltics which is
creating a Anti China environment, it is making industrialists think to have
second option in case they aim to move out from China. ASEAN is the bidder to
tap this opportunity. As earlier trends showed ASEAN unwillingness and lack of
political will in economic expansion but that is now diminishing as AEC
blueprint 2025 gives clear hints of Economic expansion.
Below chart shows the AEC
Goals
About AEC
The ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) Blueprint 2025 was adopted
by the ASEAN Leaders in 2015 as part of the ASEAN 2025[20]: Forging Ahead Together.
The new Blueprint incorporates and carries forward the work of the AEC
Blueprint 2015, which was adopted in 2007, and charts the broad trajectories of
ASEAN economic integration from 2016 to 2025 following the formal establishment
of the AEC on 31 December 2015. In 2006, ASEAN was home to the
headquarters of 49 companies in the Forbes Global 2000[21]. By 2013, that number had
risen to 74. ASEAN includes 227 of the world’s companies with more than $1
billion in revenues[22], or 3 percent of the
world’s total. Singapore is a standout, ranking fifth in the world for
corporate-headquarters density and first for foreign subsidiaries[23]. This trend can be pushed
far more by attracting the IP Based industries by providing stronger IP
infrastructure. Key points to improve the current structure are suggested in
chapter 5
3.
Individual Members & their
Significance
Outcome: This chapter
will provide you inside of ASEAN member states on individual basis to improve
the understanding.
Starting
from Singapore as it is one of the biggest and the brightest hubs in the world
for the protection of intellectual property. It has ranked 4th
in International Property Rights Index.[24]
It became a member of WTO in 1995 and complied with the TRIPs guidelines. It is
also a member of the UPOV Convention. The IP infrastructure in the country is
robust, especially in the field of dispute resolution and arbitration. This is
because Singapore’s Intellectual Property Office supports the investors and
innovates to widen the contours of their protection.[25]
The services include the latest Mobile Application for trademark registration
and partnership with ASEAN nations to fasten patent applications.[26]
Furthermore, additional funds have been allocated to the universities in the
country for research and the laws are flexible for their protection. Moreover,
it encourages research in the areas of agriculture, biotechnology, and
horticulture.[27]
MALAYSIA
After
the formation of the Malaysian Intellectual Property Corporation (MyIPO),[28]
the Intellectual Property framework of the country has improved significantly.
The country complies with the guidelines of TRIPs and has the autonomy to
manage the administration of the intellectual property rights in the country.
It is also improving its protection for IT and biotechnology.[29]
Several acts have been framed in the said regard, including but not limited to
the Computer Crimes Act, 1997, and the amendments to its Copyright Act.
However,
there has been a reported problem in the enforcement mechanisms and the working
of the judiciary. A special task force was recently set up related to these
problems, which led to an increase in IP awareness.[30]
INDONESIA
Indonesia,
like other countries, is compliant with TRIPs and has been improving since the
last two decades in terms of Intellectual Property Rights in the country. These
reforms include an added legislative will to improve the existing laws in the
country. The country amended certain significant laws such as the Copyright
Laws in 2014, which was then followed by the Patent Law in 2016. Even in the
Trademark Law, the amendments ease the registration procedure for marks and
allows registration for some non – traditional marks.
However,
due to rampant corruption and weak governance, there have continuously been
problems in the enforcement of these laws.[31]
There is a flourishing market of black and pirated products in the country
which remains mismanaged. Moreover, the lack of public awareness on IPR and
related rights also poses some problems.[32]
THE
PHILIPPINES
The
Philippines is amongst the first countries in the region to protect the
intellectual property rights of the citizens. It adopted a code that protected
the trademark, patent, copyrights, and other IP rights. The country has made
tremendous progress in its infrastructure facilities, and has worked on
increasing public awareness and has made flexible laws.
Although
the country is working hard on its IP infrastructure, one cannot ignore
specific problems. The country faces many challenges, including the slow
registration process, piracy, lax administration, and corruption, among other
things.[33]
THAILAND
Although
the history of Thailand in terms of IP protection in the country has not been
remarkable, the government of Thailand has taken steps to improve the laws
concerning Intellectual Property protection in the past few years.[34]
The steps include compliance with TRIPs, dialogues with the European Union and
the accession to the Patent Cooperation Treaty in 2009.
However,
like the other ASEAN members, several significant problems exist in the country
for effective implementation of these laws viz. piracy, lax administration, the
slow registration process for trademarks, and rampant corruption.[35]
BRUNEI
Brunei
Darussalam is not a developed country in terms of Intellectual Property
Protection, but it is compliant of the TRIPs agreement and is making
improvements in terms of creating a capable IP infrastructure in the country
through establishing IP offices, amending laws, spreading IP awareness among
the citizens and speeding the process of applications. [36]
MYANMAR
The
four Intellectual Property Laws were recently passed in 2019 by the government
of Myanmar. These laws include Trademark Law, Industrial Design Law, Patent
Law, and Copyright Law. Before that, there were no specific IP Laws except the
Burma Copyright Act, 1914, which resulted in less investment in the country due
to the lack of protection offered to the investors. The advent of these laws is
a step in the right direction. It will reduce complications, save costs, and
protect the interests of domestic and foreign investors. It will encourage the
growth of various sectors such as retail, service, and manufacturing.[37]
LAOS
Apart
from the growing economy and the strategic location of Laos, the country’s
government recognizes the importance and benefits of a friendly IP network.
There is a separate IP division in the area of Science, Technology, and
Environment Agency, popularly regarded as the STEA. It had recently promulgated
a full-fledged IP system in 2012. However, there is still a lot to be done to
create infrastructure such as anti-corruption and anti-piracy laws.[38]
VIETNAM
Vietnam
has a fully-fledged Intellectual Property Law introduced in 2006. The country
has also acceded to the Berne Convention protecting its IP rights worldwide. It
is also compliant of the TRIPs Agreement. There is a robust legislative will as
well to implement the laws.
However,
it is pertinent to note that piracy and lack of public awareness are two of the
most critical issues hindering effective implementation of the laws in the
country. The government has now pledged to increase formal IP education in the
country to increase public awareness and to generate human resources for the
same.[39]
CAMBODIA
Cambodia
is a member of the World Trade Organisation since 2004 and is working entirely
to develop an efficient IP infrastructure in the country. It has recently
complied with the TRIPs guidelines in 2017. Since the IP laws are not
completely developed, the investors have an opportunity to take the leap and
get their Intellectual Property protected.[40]
4.
Complications with IPR Enforcement in ASEAN
Outcome: This chapter throws light on
real time problems in IP enforcement in ASEAN region which will further guide
to draft a concrete suggestive measure.
After
the discussion on the conditions perpetuating in the South East Asian nations,
it is pertinent to mention that the countries have some similar problems, but diversity
exists in these nations in terms of economic, cultural, and socio-political
conditions.[41]
The
countries tried to cooperate and they recognized the importance of IP for the
promotion of investment in the region, which led to the advent of the ASEAN
Framework Agreement on IP Cooperation in 1995.[42] The agreement established joint ASEAN
regional offices for patent and trademark protection and an association for
safeguarding intellectual property in ASEAN.[43]
In
the surge of the betterment of IP infrastructure in the region, the agreement
ensured a unified IP system. However, there is still a long way to go. There
have been reported issues on the resistance of single Intellectual Property
System due to a decrease in the revenue system, lack of adequate resources in
specific regions, and lack of public awareness regarding IP laws.[44]
Furthermore, the lack of anti-piracy laws creates further problems in efficient
enforcement of the laws.[45]
Moreover, lack of administrative, civil, and criminal setup poses a fundamental
problem for the efficient implementation of these laws.[46]
Some
of the issues are:
1.
Lack of adequate litigations
Unification
of laws does not only include formation of laws but also the implementation of
these laws. Several different factors come into play when a country or a region
wants to implement these laws. These include administrative actions, civil
litigations and criminal actions.
Administrative
actions practically deal with the filing of the case to the administrative
tribunals. Effective administrative actions lead to speedy and timely
resolution of cases, which is a boon for the country and the investors.[47]
Civil
Litigation deals with legal action against the infringer of IP rights. These
are generally filed against breach of contracts and infringement of one’s
patent, copyright and trademark. These involve additional cost and time. Firms
need to file a civil suit if negotiations against the infringer fail.[48]
Criminal
Actions is a more severe action that acts as a last resort to stop the infringement
of Intellectual Property Rights forcefully.[49]
It
is pertinent to mention that the unification of these nations is ensured when
civil and criminal litigation and administrative action collaborate.
Notably,
different countries in ASEAN face these issues. Countries such as Thailand,
Vietnam, Myanmar, and Laos posses’ issues related to efficient administration
due to lack of financial and formal human resources.[50] Moreover, Myanmar, Brunei, and Laos do not
have thoroughly developed and efficient IP systems.[51]
Therefore, it is challenging to enforce civil litigation.
2.
Cost concerned and time period
The
cost of obtaining Intellectual Property protection in the South East Asian
region is exorbitantly high, which not only includes the cost of registration
of patents, trademarks, copyrights, or industrial designs but also includes the
cost of attorneys and translators.[52]
Moreover,
the average period required for registration of Intellectual Property in ASEAN
is also high. There have been instances where companies obtained IP right in
over a decade. In a consistently changing environment, extended time in getting
IP registered can be harmful to the investors as it reduces their probable
profits and increases the chances of piracy.
3.
Public
Awareness
The
investors, wanting to invest in ASEAN, often complain of the lack of
infrastructure to provide relevant knowledge to them regarding the procedures
involved in processes, the status of applications, and rules and procedures in
a universal language. Furthermore, the lack of adequate knowledge amongst the
locals also hinders their rights and also lead to piracy, which is another big
issue in the ASEAN.[53]
4.
Piracy
Piracy
or counterfeiting is one of the biggest concerns for the effective
implementation of IP laws in ASEAN. The most affected among these rights is the
trademark, which is exploited in this region. Formation of quick and effective
measures to curb these practices is essential.[54]
5.
International Standards
Harmonization
in terms of compliance with international agreements and treaties is an
essential part of any group to function. In the case of ASEAN, it is pertinent
to mention that not all nations in the region are a part of standard protocols
signed among the nations.[55]
Myanmar is yet to accede to the Madrid Protocol for trademark registration.[56]
Furthermore, some ASEAN nations have not acceded to the Paris, and the Berne
Convention.[57]
The
disparity in terms of income, laws, administration, and justice delivery system
in these countries affect the goals set by the ASEAN Economic Community. This
hinders the strategies concerning economic integration between nations, single
market, mutual development, tariff elimination, and overall facilitation of
trade.[58]
Therefore,
there is a huge need for reforms in the existing circumstances to bring a
much-needed change so that the vision of the ASEAN Economic Community can be
fulfilled.
5. Ceasing the impeder’s
Outcome: This chapter will conclude
by telling all the ways by which IP Infrastructure of ASEAN can be improved.
The below suggestions are processed analytically and if implemented, it will
not only improve the IP investment but will also help ASEAN to emerge out of the impeder’s
which not directly linked to IP industry but still are causing hindering effect
in it(some mentioned in chapter 4).Every suggestion below is drafted in a way
to ultimately increase the AEC 2025 goal through IP Development.
ASEAN must initiate a short and departmental
program work to Improving patent, trademark, and industrial design services and
Promote improvement of Intellectual Property (IP) services in terms of
timeliness and quality of output[59].
This can be further extended by promoting the excellence of collective management
organizations (CMOs) in transparency, accountability and governance.
ASEAN should explore
the feasibility of harmonizing formality requirements [60]for
trademarks and industrial designs across the region while seeing this a
technology solution must be on priority. ASEAN Should Accede to international
treaties: Madrid Protocol; Hague Agreement; and Patent Co-operation Treaty
(PCT)[61],
this should be done by giving individual attention to each member states •
Endeavour to accede to other World Intellectual Property Organisation
(WIPO)-administered international treaties should be in the priority consideration.
During the
implementation of the suggestions given above, some more points need to be
taken care of which are mentioned below.
- Create targeted and sustainable
capacity building and office-initiated client-assistance programs linked
to different levels of development, with particular focus on CLM
(Cambodia, Lao People's Democratic Republic, and Myanmar[62]).
As Myanmar remains on the locational advantage to access the Indian
Market, it requires individual monitoring.
- Develop a fresh cloud based
technology network of integrated IP services for the region, including
technology transfer offices and innovation technology support offices
(patent libraries) As Singapore is the world's headquarters destination by
doing the part mentioned above this can further manage the density of
MNC's offices across the region [63]
- Upgrade service delivery of AMSs
(ASEAN Member state) through E-services, including copyright, trademark,
patent and industrial design search systems, and E filing systems [64]
- Acquire the AI integrated IT
Technical assistance to improve quality of regional ceremonies, together
with the development of an automated system for electronic conformity and
dossier systems for trademarks; online filing; sharing of copyright and
patent information through the establishment of regional copyright,
trademark and patent databases, and updating an improvement of the local
industrial design and trademark databases
- Integrate and centralize the
management of the ASEAN Intellectual Property Portal by ensuring that data
related to regional IP Progress, including statistical data, is accurate
and regularly updated (e.g., no. of filings, registrations, grants,
pendency periods).It must be done in way to create a good public image and
confidence This will attract outsiders who are tracing the development
online[65].
- Implement all above solution
with the Regional Action Plan on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)
Enforcement, creation of new action plan can be avoided, and the action
plan which failed earlier due to poor implementation can be implemented
this time more authentic monitoring with more political and administrative
will [66]
- Set up an ASEAN IP network (IP,
judiciary, customs and other enforcement agencies) and Enhance internal
and external ASEAN engagement [67]with
external partners and stakeholders, including dialogue.
Partners/consultations with the private sector/IP associations (e.g.,
ASEAN Intellectual Property Association, International Trademark
Association, WIPO Singapore Office)
- Develop a regional accreditation
system for IP practitioners and IP enthusiast. Develop Intellectual
Property valuation services to create awareness of the value of
Intellectual Property as a financial asset, and this should be done very
seriously as it will inevitably impact if done with international
standards[68].
9.
Promote the commercialization of geographical
indications (GIs) in ASEAN by improving the capacity of the productive sector in
the development of protection and branding strategies and Promote a secure
mechanism for Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural
Expressions (GRTKTCE)[69]
10. Lastly
and importantly, ASEAN should change its previous trend and should follow a
more inclusive attitude in regards to:
(i)
Cultural, intellectual and artistic creativity and their commercialization;
(ii)
Efficient adoption and adaptation of advanced technologies; and
(iii)
Continuous, learning to meet the increasing expectations of stakeholders of
AEC.[70]
Conclusion
China remains the Goliath of growing
markets, with every fluctuation in its GDP making headlines around the world.
But investors and global giants are increasingly turning their gaze southward
to the ten dynamic markets that collaborate to make the promising Association
of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The continuous increase in demand of this
region has not only made them the best market to sell but also their increasing
political will to expand and strategic location with India has attracted the
global investors and manufacturing giants. As mentioned in chapter 1, it is
apparent that how much Intellectual property is affecting the economy in a
positive way and after reading chapter 2, we can claim the significance of
ASEAN in future global trade. Hence after analysing the trends and the current
ASEAN IP infrastructure and problems mentioned in trailing chapters, it is
found that if ASEAN can implement the suggestions mentioned in chapter 5, it
can not only push the achievements of its AEC 2025 goals but can also dominate
the future markets. This paper concludes by determining the growing
significance of intellectual property across the world, and how the same can be
used for regional development by ASEAN to accomplish its personal goals like
AEC goal of 2025
[2] Rodolfo C. Severino, ASEAN and the World, in Southeast Asia in Search of an ASEAN Community 256–341
(2006).
[3] Keith E. Maskus, Intellectual
Property Rights and Economic Development, 32 Case W.
Res. J. Int'l L. 471 (2000
[4] Edmund W. Sim, The Outsourcing
of Legal Norms and Institutions by the ASEAN Economic Community,
1 Indon. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 314 (2014).
[5] Rodolfo C. Severino & Moe Thuzar, ASEAN Economic Cooperation and Its Political Realities, in Moving
the AEC Beyond 2015: Managing Domestic Consensus for Community-Building 24–43
(Siew Yean Tham & Sanchita Basu Das eds., 2017)
[6] Chien-Huei Wu, ASEAN at the Crossroads:
Trap and Track between CPTPP and RCEP, Journal of International
Economic Law, Volume 23, Issue 1, March 2020, Pages 97–117,
[7] Muhammad Rifky Wicaksono , Kusuma
Raditya , Laurensia Andrini , Muhammad Hawin , Paripurna Sugarda,
Herliana & Hariyanto, Implementing the Extraterritoriality
Principle to Strengthen Competition Law Enforcement in Indonesia in the AEC
Era: A Comparative Study, 9 Indon. L. Rev. 27 (2019)
[8] Mark McGillivray et al., Understanding the ASEAN Development Gap, in The
3rd ASEAN Reader 95–98 (2015).
[9] Paul Belleflamme, Martin Peitz, Intellectual Property, in Industrial Organization: Markets and
Strategies , 531–572
[10] Digital technologies, intellectual
property and development, in Trade Governance in the Digital Age: World
Trade Forum 365–454 (Mira Burri & Thomas Cottier eds., 2012).
[11] Keith E. Maskus, Teaching the economics of intellectual property rights in the
global economy, in Teaching of Intellectual Property: Principles
and Methods 166–184 (Yo Takagi, Larry Allman, & Mpazi A.
Sinjela eds., 2008).
[12] Ching-Fu Lin, The Emergence of
ASEAN Regional Food Safety Governance: Structure, Substance, and Context,
74 Food & Drug L.J. 80 (2019)
[13] Nguyen Khanh Doanh & Yoon Heo, Impacts of Intellectual Property
Rights on Trade Flows in ASEAN Countries, 14 Journal of International and Area
Studies 1–15
(2007).
[14] Steven D. Anderman, Intellectual property rights
and competition law in smaller and medium sized open economies, in The
Interface Between Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy 313–314
(Steven D. Anderman ed., 2007).
[15] Ivan Morales, Balancing
Intellectual Property Rights and Clean Technology Development: Encouraging
Cooperation, 17
Hous. J. Health L. & Pol'y 405 (2017).
[16] David P. Schmidt, Intellectual Property Battles in a Technological Global Economy: A
Just War Analysis, 14 Business
Ethics Quarterly 679–693 (2004).
[19] Stefano Inama & Edmund W. Sim, Overview of ASEAN, in The Foundation of the ASEAN Economic
Community: An Institutional and Legal Profile 19–35 (2015).
[20] Irene Calboli, The ASEAN Way or
No Way: A Closer Look at the Absence of a Common Rule on Intellectual Property
Exhaustion in ASEAN and the Impact on the ASEAN Market, 14 U. Pa.
Asian L. Rev. 363 (2019).
[22] Sungjoon Cho & Jurgen
Kurtz, Legalizing the ASEAN Way: Adapting and Reimagining the ASEAN
Investment Regime, 66 Am. J. Comp. L. 233 (2018).
[23] Peter Cornelius, Corporate Practices and
National Governance Systems: what Do Country Rankings Tell Us,
6 German L.J. 583 (2005).
[24]
2019 International Property Rights Index, Property Rights Alliance,
https://www.internationalpropertyrightsindex.org/country/singapore.
[25]
Singapore keeps top spot in Asia for IP protection, The Strait Times, (Oct. 19,
2019),
https://www.straitstimes.com/business/economy/singapore-keeps-top-spot-in-asia-for-ip-protection.
[26]
Singapore’s IP office Launches World’s First Mobile App for Trademark
Protection, IP Watchdog, (Aug. 27, 2019), https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2019/08/27/singapores-ip-office-launches-worlds-first-mobile-app-trademark-applications/id=112600/ https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2019/08/27/singapores-ip-office-launches-worlds-first-mobile-app-trademark-applications/id=112600/.
[27]
R.C. Dreyfuss and J. Pila, Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law, Vol. 1
No. 1, 362 (2018).
[28]
Malaysian Intellectual Property Office,
http://www.myipo.gov.my/en/about/#:~:text=ABOUT%20MyIPO&text=The%20Division%20was%20tasked%20to,Act%202000%20came%20into%20force.
[29]
N.A. Mohamed Yusof, The State of Social Progress in Islamic Societies,
Establishing Patent Standard: the Case of Biotechnology Invention in Malaysia,
(Apr. 2016).
[30]
C. Antons, Intellectual Property in ASEAN countries, European IP Review, Vol.
13 No. 3 (1991)
[31]
M. Barthos and Rineke Sara, Dysfunctional IP Infringements and Ineffectiveness
of Enforcement Mechanisms under Indonesian Laws, Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, Vol. 22
No.1 (2019).
[32]
Id.
[33]
N. Barizah, The Development of ASEAN’s Intellectual Property Rights Law; From
Trips Compliance to Harmonization, Indonesia Law Review (2017),
https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/62955-EN-the-development-of-aseans-intellectual-p.pdf.
[34]
Supra Note 7.
[35]
Id.
[36]
Supra Note 10.
[37]
D. Sharma, Myanmar Passed Legislation to Protect Intellectual Property, Mondaq
(Feb. 20, 2019), https://www.mondaq.com/trademark/782500/myanmar-passed-legislation-to-protect-intellectual-property.
[38]
Supra Note 10.
[39]
A. Sitkoff, IPR Protection and Enforcement in Vietnam is Not as Strong as it
Should Be, Vietnam Law Magazine (May 2018), https://vietnamlawmagazine.vn/ipr-protection-and-enforcement-in-vietnam-is-not-as-strong-as-it-should-be-6217.html.
[40]
Supra Note 7
[41]Evan
Garcia, Intellectual Property for Development: The ASEAN Story (Aug. 2017),
https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2017/04/article_0006.html
[42]ASEAN
Framework Agreement on Intellectual Property Cooperation, Bangkok, Thailand
(Dec. 15, 1995),
https://asean.org/?static_post=asean-framework-agreement-on-intellectual-property-cooperation-bangkok-thailand-15-december-1995.
[43]
Supra Note 2, See Article 1 and Article 3
[44]
P. Fowler, T. Charoenpot and C. Chernkwamna, ASEAN and Intellectual Property:
Will a Complicated History Lead to a Certain Future?, 40 Loy. L.A. Int’I
&Comp. L. Rev. 167 (2017) http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/ilr/vol40/iss2/2
[45]
C. Antons, Intellectual Property in ASEAN countries, European IP Review, Vol.
13 No. 3 (1991)
[46]
IPR Enforcement in South-East Asia, South-East Asia IPR SME Helpdesk (2017),
https://www.southeastasia-iprhelpdesk.eu/sites/default/files/publications/EN_Enforcement.pdf.
[48]
Supra Note 6
[49]
Supra Note 6, See Pp.7
[50]
Supra Note 5
[51]
Supra Note 5
[52]
Anthony De Andrade and V. Vishwanath, Patenting Costs in ASEAN: Upcoming Global
Economic Powerhouse, IP Watchdog, (Apr. 17, 2017), https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/04/07/patenting-costs-asean-upcoming-global-economic-powerhouse/id=81695/;
See also, Anthony De Andrade and V. Vishwanath, The Cost of Registering a
Trademark in Southeast Asia, IP Watchdog, (Jan. 18, 2018),
https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/01/18/cost-register-trademark-southeast-asia/id=92311/.
[53]
N. Barizah, The Development of ASEAN’s Intellectual Property Rights Law; From
Trips Compliance to Harmonization, Indonesia Law Review (2017),
https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/62955-EN-the-development-of-aseans-intellectual-p.pdf.
[54]
Steve Morrish, counterfeiting in Asia – You Make It, They Fake It, SCMS, (May
17, 2016), https://www.smcs-risk.com/counterfeiting-in-asia/
[55]
Supra Note 13
[56]
A. Debray, Myanmar: Myanmar’s new Trademark Law, Mondaq, (Feb. 11, 2020),
https://www.mondaq.com/trademark/892264/myanmar39s-new-trademark-law#:~:text=Myanmar%3A%20Myanmar's%20New%20Trademark%20Law&text=Myanmar%20already%20bears%20the%20brunt,ASEAN%20countries%20and%20international%20standards.
[57]
Supra Note 6
[59] Intellectual Property Interoperability
and the ASEAN Way, in International Intellectual Property and the
ASEAN Way: Pathways to Interoperability 1–78 (Elizabeth Siew-Kuan
Ng & Graeme W. Austin eds., 2017).
[60] International Intellectual
Property and the ASEAN Way: Pathways to Interoperability, (Elizabeth
Siew-Kuan Ng & Graeme W. Austin eds., 2017).
[62] Kristina Jönsson, Authoritarian States in Southeast Asia in Times of Globalization:
Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar, in Globalization and its Counter-Forces in
Southeast Asia 21–50 (2008).
[63] Michael A. Witt, Corporate governance and
initial public offerings in Singapore*, in Corporate
Governance and Initial Public Offerings: An International Perspective 378–396
(Alessandro Zattoni & William Judge eds., 2012).
[64] Technology Transfer and Development in Asean:
Machinery and Electronics Industries, in Technology and Skills in ASEAN: An Overview 97–118
(1988).
[65] Ashish Arora, Andrea Fosfuri &
Alfonso Gambardella, Markets for Technology,
Intellectual Property Rights, and Development, in International
Public Goods and Transfer of Technology Under a Globalized Intellectual
Property Regime 321–336 (Keith E. Maskus & Jerome H. Reichman
eds., 2005).
[66] Rodolfo C. Severino, Institutional Development in ASEAN, in ASEAN-Canada
Forum 2008 55–62 (2010).
[67] Mahani Zainal Abidin & Firdaos
Rosli, Infrastructure Development in ASEAN, in ASEAN
Economic Community Scorecard: Performance and Perception 136–162
(2013).
[68] Bryan Mercurio, Intellectual Property Rights, Trade, and Economic Development, in Law
and Development Perspective on International Trade Law 49–80 (Yong-Shik
Lee et al. eds., 2011).
[69] Elizabeth Siew-Kuan Ng, ASEAN IP
Harmonization: Striking the Delicate Balance,
25 Pace Int'l L. Rev. 129 (2013
[70] Sungjoon Cho & Jurgen
Kurtz, Legalizing the ASEAN Way: Adapting and Reimagining the ASEAN
Investment Regime, 66 Am. J. Comp. L. 233 (2018
Article Information
SETTING THE BLOCKS FOR ASEAN: HOW IP INJECTION CAN INCREASE THE FRUITFULNESS OF AEC AND ITS GOAL OF 2025
Authors: ABHISHEK SHARMA, ANNANY MAMGAIN, ARYAN GARG
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/06/01
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.