Article 27 defines the patentability requirement for all technological inventions and assumes that exceptions are treated very limitedly, which do not reflect the balance of rights and obligations that have been concluded in other WTO agreements, such as the GATT [Articles XX and XXI] and the GATS [XIV and XIV to]). In these other agreements, the exceptions will be in the form of general and security exceptions. The language used in these other agreements – nothing in this agreement prevents each Member from taking action to … – recognises and takes into account important public policy concerns (the public interest and important national objectives); And it was an essential way to ensure balanced agreements. These exceptions are even more important in the TRIPS agreement, as they mainly concern private rights, unlike other agreements; and traditionally, intellectual property laws contain provisions to strike a balance between rights holders and society. But the trips agreement outlines all the limited exceptions it attempts to make to prevent important political action. 1. Members agreed to engage in negotiations to strengthen the protection of the various geographical indications in accordance with Article 23. Paragraphs 4 to 8 below cannot be used by a member to refuse to negotiate or conclude bilateral or multilateral agreements. As part of these negotiations, members are prepared to consider the subsequent applicability of these provisions to the individual geographical indications whose use has been the subject of these negotiations. Since the TRIPS agreement came into force, it has been criticized by developing countries, scientists and non-governmental organizations. While some of this criticism is generally opposed to the WTO, many proponents of trade liberalization also view TRIPS policy as a bad policy. The effects of the concentration of WEALTH of TRIPS (money from people in developing countries for copyright and patent holders in industrialized countries) and the imposition of artificial shortages on citizens of countries that would otherwise have had weaker intellectual property laws are common bases for such criticisms.

Other critics have focused on the inability of trips trips to accelerate the flow of investment and technology to low-income countries, a benefit that WTO members achieved prior to the creation of the agreement. The World Bank`s statements indicate that TRIPS have clearly not accelerated investment in low-income countries, whereas they may have done so for middle-income countries. [33] As part of TRIPS, long periods of patent validity were examined to determine the excessive slowdown in generic drug entry and competition.