Emory International Law Review

Volume 30Issue 1
Comments

TRIPS and Compulsory Licensing: Increasing Participation in the Medicines Patent Pool in the Wake of an HIV/AIDS Treatment Timebomb

Lauren Ulrich | 30 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 51 (2015)

Despite the significant progress that has been made in recent decades to increase access to HIV/AIDS antiretroviral medicines in developing countries, a treatment timebomb awaits unless immediate action is taken to decrease the price of antiretroviral drugs. The Medicines Patent Pool (MPP) can serve as a valuable tool to increase access to patented HIV medicines in developing countries if participation in the pool by patent holders can be increased. This Comment argues that governments in countries hardest hit by the HIV/AIDS epidemic can increase participation in the MPP by collectively exercising TRIPS flexibilities and issue compulsory licenses for HIV medicines. Such a concerted effort by low- and middle-income countries to issue compulsory licenses could make the MPP more effective at increasing access to new and more affordable HIV medicines to respond to the treatment timebomb.

Read More »

The Best Practice of Forgetting

Bunny Sandefur | 30 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 85 (2015)

In the Google Spain v. AEPD and Mario Costeja Gonzalez decision, the Court of Justice of the European Union determined that citizens of European Union member states have the right to ask search engine companies to remove certain personal information from search results. This Comment argues that the lack of specific guidance in the Costeja decision ultimately created significant burdens on citizens, search engine companies, and EU member states. To mitigate these burdens, this Comment proposes a Centralized Data Protection Agency to receive requests directly from citizens, weigh the privacy versus public interest rights, and make decisions that would be binding across all member states. This solution would make the request process easier for citizens, relieve private search engine companies from the daunting responsibility of determining legal privacy rights, and insulate member states from conflicting local implementation.

Read More »

International Law and the “Globalization” of the Arctic: Assessing the Rights of Non-Arctic States in the High North

Shiloh Rainwater | 30 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 115 (2015)

The Arctic Council’s decision in 2013 to admit six new non-Arctic states as permanent observers symbolically legitimized the interests of peripheral actors in the region. Still, non-Arctic states remain significantly disadvantaged with respect to actually pursuing their Arctic interests. Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, most of the Arctic’s resources and both currently-accessible Arctic shipping routes are exclusively controlled by the littoral Arctic states. Regional actors likewise dominate arctic governance, as non-Arctic states are denied speaking and voting privileges at the Arctic Council. These disparities not only harm the interests of non-Arctic states, but also undermine the effectiveness of the Arctic Council. Consequently, a more inclusive, international approach to Arctic governance is necessary to address the challenges of a globalized Arctic.

Read More »