1
Dutfield, Graham, Suthersanen, Uma. Global intellectual property law: commentary and materials. Cheltenham: : Edward Elgar 2008.
2
Dutfield G, Suthersanen U. Global intellectual property law: commentary and materials. Cheltenham: : Edward Elgar 2008.
3
Goodin RE, Pettit P, Pogge T. A companion to contemporary political philosophy. 2nd ed. Chichester: : Wiley-Blackwell 2012.
4
Goodin, Robert E., Pettit, Philip. A Companion to contemporary political philosophy. Oxford, UK: : Blackwell 1998. http://0-search.ebscohost.com.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=44511&site=ehost-live
5
Gosseries, Axel, Marciano, Alain, Strowel, Alain. Intellectual property and theories of justice. Basingstoke [England]: : Palgrave Macmillan 2008.
6
Edwin C. Hettinger. Justifying Intellectual Property. Philosophy & Public Affairs 1989;18:31–52.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/2265190
7
D. B. Resnik. A Pluralistic Account of Intellectual Property. Journal of Business Ethics 2003;46:319–35.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/25075110
8
Dutfield G, Suthersanen U. Global intellectual property law: commentary and materials. Cheltenham: : Edward Elgar 2008.
9
Drahos P. Global property rights in information: the story of TRIPS at the GATT. Prometheus 1995;13:6–19. doi:10.1080/08109029508629187
10
Fischer-Lescano, Andreas. Regime-Collisions: The Vain Search for Legal Unity in the Fragmentation of Global Law. Michigan Journal of International Law 2003;25:999–1046.http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/mjil25&id=1013&collection=journals&index=journals/mjil#1013
11
Helfer, Laurence R. Regime Shifting: The TRIPs Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking. Yale Journal of International Law 2004;29:1–83.http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/yjil29&id=11&collection=journals&index=journals/yjil#11
12
Maskus KE, Penubarti M. How trade-related are intellectual property rights? Journal of International Economics 1995;39:227–48. doi:10.1016/0022-1996(95)01377-8
13
Sell S, May C. Moments in Law: Contestation and Settlement in the History of Intellectual Property. Review of International Political Economy 2001;8:467–500.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/4177394
14
Dutfield G, Suthersanen U. Global intellectual property law: commentary and materials. Cheltenham: : Edward Elgar 2008.
15
Frederick M. Abbott. The WTO Medicines Decision: World Pharmaceutical Trade and the Protection of Public Health. The American Journal of International Law 2005;99:317–58.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/1562501
16
Kuanpoth J. Patents and access to medicines in Thailand – the DDI case and beyond. Intellectual Property Quarterly 2006;:149–58.http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/authentication/sso/athens?redirect=/maf/wluk/app/document?docguid=IBD9A8B50E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028
17
Matthews D. From the August 30, 2003 WTO decision to the December 6, 2005 agreement on an amendment to TRIPS: improving access to medicines in developing countries? Intellectual Property Quarterly 2006;:91–130.http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/authentication/sso/athens?redirect=/maf/wluk/app/document?docguid=IBD9A3D30E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028
18
Pogge TW. Human rights and global health: a research program. Metaphilosophy 2005;36:182–209. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9973.2005.00362.x
19
Rangnekar D. Context and Ambiguity in the Making of Law: A Comment on Amending India’s Patent Act. The Journal of World Intellectual Property 2007;10:365–87. doi:10.1111/j.1747-1796.2007.00327.x
20
Dwijen Rangnekar. The Supreme Court Judgment. Economic and Political Weekly 2013;48:39–40.http://0-www.epw.in.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/glivec-precedent/supreme-court-judgment.html
21
Scherer FM. Post-TRIPS Options for Access to Patented Medicines in Developing Nations. Journal of International Economic Law 2002;5:913–39. doi:10.1093/jiel/5.4.913
22
Susan K. Sell and Aseem Prakash. Using Ideas Strategically: The Contest between Business and NGO Networks in Intellectual Property Rights. International Studies Quarterly 2004;48:143–75.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/3693567
23
Dutfield G, Suthersanen U. Global intellectual property law: commentary and materials. Cheltenham: : Edward Elgar 2008.
24
Aoki, Keith. Reclaiming Common Heritage Treatment in the International Plant Genetic Resources Regime Complex. Michigan State Law Review 2007;2007:35–70.http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/mslr2007&id=41&collection=journals&index=journals/mslr#41
25
Tansey G, Rajotte T. The future control of food: a guide to international negotiations and rules on intellectual property, biodiversity and food security. London: : Earthscan 2008.
26
Final report: Assessing the economic implications of different models for implementing the requirement to protect plant varieties Report Work Package 6 Impacts of the IPR Rules on Sustainable Development. http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_final_report.pdf
27
Muriel Lightbourne, Graham Dutfield. Review of Literature: Law. http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_legal_literature_review.pdf
28
Dr Dwijen Rangnekar. Review of Literature: Economics. http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_economic_literature_review.pdf
29
Country case studies: Bulgaria. http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_bulgaria_case_study.pdf
30
Muriel Lightbourne, Lois Muraguri. Country case studies: China. http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_china_case_study.pdf
31
Muriel Lightbourne. Country case studies: Ethiopia. http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_ethiopia_case_study.pdf
32
Dr Dwijen Rangnekar. Country case studies: India. http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_india_case_study.pdf
33
Dr Dwijen Rangnekar. Country case studies: Kenya. http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_kenya_case_study.pdf
34
Mr. Ivan Ivanov, Dr. Burcak Yildiz *, Mrs.Ofelia Tsonkova, et al. Country case studies: Turkey. http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_turkey_case_study.pdf
35
Glenn E. Bugos and Daniel J. Kevles. Plants as Intellectual Property: American Practice, Law, and Policy in World Context. Osiris 1992;7:74–104.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/301768
36
Oguamanam, Chidi. Regime Tension in the Intellectual Property Rights Arena: Farmers’ Rights and Post-TRIPS Counter Regime Trends. Dalhousie Law Journal 2006;29:413–53.http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/dalholwj29&id=417&collection=journals&index=journals/dalholwj#417
37
Van Overwalle, Geertrui. Patent Protection for Plants: A Comparison of American and European Approaches. IDEA: The Journal of Law and Technology 1998;39:143–94.http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/idea39&id=153&collection=journals&index=journals/idea#153
38
Pottage, Alain. Organisms and Manufactures: On the History of Plant Inventions. Melbourne University Law Review 2007;31:539–68.http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/mulr31&id=545&collection=journals&index=journals/mulr#545
39
Rangnekar D. Geneva Rhetoric, National Reality: The Political Economy of Introducing Plant Breeders’ Rights in Kenya. New Political Economy 2014;19:359–83. doi:10.1080/13563467.2013.796445
40
Dutfield G, Suthersanen U. Global intellectual property law: commentary and materials. Cheltenham: : Edward Elgar 2008.
41
Orit Fischman Afori. The battle over public e-libraries - taking stock and moving ahead. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 2013;44:392–417.http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/authentication/sso/athens?redirect=/maf/wluk/app/document?docguid=IF22AC1A0003211E3B164951DE82E22A7
42
James Boyle. The Second Enclosure Movement and the Construction of the Public Domain. Law and Contemporary Problems 2003;66:33–74.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/20059171
43
Brennan DJ. The three step test frenzy - why the TRIPs panel decision might be considered per incuriam. Intellectual Property Quarterly 2002;:212–25.http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/authentication/sso/athens?redirect=/maf/wluk/app/document?docguid=IBDA3DA20E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028
44
Chon, Margaret. Intellectual Property from Below: Copyright and Capability for Education. UC Davis Law Review 2006;40.http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/davlr40&id=811&collection=journals&index=journals/davlr#811
45
Davies P. Access v contract: competing freedoms in the context of copyright limitations and exceptions for libraries. European Intellectual Property Review 2013;35:402–14.http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/authentication/sso/athens?redirect=/maf/wluk/app/document?docguid=IE65B9540CF9311E2BE21CEDEB7CBC1AF
46
David Lange. Reimagining the Public Domain. Law and Contemporary Problems 2003;66:463–83.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/20059182
47
Lawrence Liang. Porous Legalities and Avenues of Participation. Sarai Reader. ;5:6–17.http://preview.sarai.net/journal/05_pdf/01/02_lawrence.pdf
48
Dutfield G, Suthersanen U. Global intellectual property law: commentary and materials. Cheltenham: : Edward Elgar 2008.
49
Isabella Alexander. Criminalising Copyright: A Story of Publishers, Pirates and Pieces of Eight. The Cambridge Law Journal 2007;66:625–56.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/4500946
50
Thomas Hays. The evolution and decentralisation of secondary liability for infringements of copyright-protected works: Part 1. European Intellectual Property Review 2006;28:617–24.http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/authentication/sso/athens?redirect=/maf/wluk/app/document?docguid=IA6B6A6B1736911DBBC5FBBC8B16DD80C
51
Hays T. Secondary liability for infringements of copyright-protected works: Part 2. European Intellectual Property Review 2007;29:15–21.http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/authentication/sso/athens?redirect=/maf/wluk/app/document?docguid=I332EC29083EA11DBB3FCBE5277E55AAD
52
Lawrence Lessig. The Architecture of Innovation. Duke Law Journal 2002;51:1783–801.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/1373215
53
Glynn S. Lunney, Jr. The Death of Copyright: Digital Technology, Private Copying, and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Virginia Law Review 2001;87:813–920.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/1073857
54
Felix Oberholzer-Gee. File Sharing and Copyright. Innovation Policy and the Economy 2010;10:19–55.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/10.1086/605852
55
Dutfield G, Suthersanen U. Global intellectual property law: commentary and materials. Cheltenham: : Edward Elgar 2008.
56
Raustiala K, Munzer SR. The Global Struggle over Geographic Indications. European Journal of International Law 2007;18:337–65. doi:10.1093/ejil/chm016
57
Tomer Broude. Taking ‘Trade and Culture’ Seriously: Geographical Indications and Cultural Protection in WTO Law. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law 2005;26:623–92.http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1220&context=jil
58
Dev Gangjee. Say cheese! A sharper image of generic use through the lens of Feta. European Intellectual Property Review 2007;29:172–9.http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/authentication/sso/athens?redirect=/maf/wluk/app/document?docguid=I1336AA90E3BF11DB89BDCBD5DE2603F0
59
Handler, Michael. WTO Geographical Indications Dispute, The. Modern Law Review 2006;69:70–91.http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/modlr69&id=72&collection=journals&index=journals/modlr#72
60
Dr Dwijen Rangnekar, editor. The Journal of World Intellectual Property. Journal of World Intellectual Property;13.http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/doi/10.1111/jwip.2010.13.issue-2/issuetoc
61
Rangnekar D. Remaking place: the social construction of a Geographical Indication for Feni. Environment and Planning A 2011;43:2043–59. doi:10.1068/a43259
62
Madhavi Sunder. The Invention of Traditional Knowledge. Law and Contemporary Problems 2007;70:97–124.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/27592181
63
Dutfield G, Suthersanen U. Global intellectual property law: commentary and materials. Cheltenham: : Edward Elgar 2008.
64
Schroeder, Doris. Justice and the Convention on Biological Diversity. Ethics & International Affairs;23:267–80.http://0-search.proquest.com.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/docview/200506101/78110A6A2ABD4AFAPQ/6?accountid=14888
65
Stephanie Bucher. The protection of genetic resources and indigenous knowledge: disclosure of origin on the international and Latin-American agenda. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 2008;39:35–50.http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/authentication/sso/athens?redirect=/maf/wluk/app/document?docguid=I7FAB7740EC9811DC86FAA1B92020162A
66
Buck M, Hamilton C. The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law 2011;20:47–61. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9388.2011.00703.x
67
Coombe RJ. Legal Claims to Culture in and Against the Market: Neoliberalism and the Global Proliferation of Meaningful Difference. Law, Culture and the Humanities 2005;1:35–52. doi:10.1191/1743872105lw010oa
68
Dutfield G. A critical analysis of the debate on traditional knowledge, drug discovery and patent-based biopiracy. European Intellectual Property Review 2011;33:238–44.http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/authentication/sso/athens?redirect=/maf/wluk/app/document?docguid=ID0A36C504C5F11E0AF15C99E7468439C
69
Morgera E, Tsioumani E. The Evolution of Benefit Sharing: Linking Biodiversity and Community Livelihoods. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law 2010;19:150–73. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9388.2010.00674.x
70
John B. Kleba, Dwijen Rangneka. Fairness and equity: interrogating the Nagoya protocol: Special issue. Law, Environment and Development Journal 2013;9.http://www.lead-journal.org/content/13097.pdf
71
Dutfield G, Suthersanen U. Global intellectual property law: commentary and materials. Cheltenham: : Edward Elgar 2008.
72
Menescal AK. Changing WIPO’S Ways?. The 2004 Development Agenda in Historical Perspective. The Journal of World Intellectual Property 2005;8:761–96. doi:10.1111/j.1747-1796.2005.tb00277.x
73
de Beer J. Implementing the World Intellectual Property Organization’s development agenda. 1st edition. Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2009:
74
Amy Kapczynski. The Access to Knowledge Mobilization and the New Politics of Intellectual Property. The Yale Law Journal 2008;117:804–85.http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/20455812
75
Maskus, Keith E. Lessons from Studying the International Economics of Intellectual Property Rights. Vanderbilt Law Review 2000;53:2219–39.http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/vanlr53&id=2247&collection=journals&index=journals/vanlr#2247
76
May C. The World Intellectual Property Organisation and the Development Agenda. Global Society 2008;22:97–113. doi:10.1080/13600820701740753
77
Yu, Peter K. Tale of Two Development Agendas, A. Ohio Northern University Law Review 2009;35:465–573.http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/onulr35&id=469&collection=journals&index=journals/onulr#469
