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. Vol. Blackwell companions to philosophy. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012.
4.
Goodin, Robert E., Pettit, Philip. A Companion to contemporary political philosophy [Internet]. Vol. Blackwell companions to philosophy. Oxford, UK: Blackwell; 1998. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 1989;18(1):31–52. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2003;46(4):319–35. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 1995;13(1):6–19. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/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 [Internet]. 2003;25:999–1046. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2004;29:1–83. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 1995;39(3–4):227–48. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/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 [Internet]. 2001;8(3):467–500. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2005;99(2):317–58. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2006;(2):149–58. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2006;91–130. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2005;36(1–2):182–209. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/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 [Internet]. 2007;10(5):365–87. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/10.1111/j.1747-1796.2007.00327.x
20.
Dwijen Rangnekar. The Supreme Court Judgment. Economic and Political Weekly [Internet]. 2013;48(32):39–40. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2002;5(4):913–39. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/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 [Internet]. 2004;48(1):143–75. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2007;2007:35–70. Available from: 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 [Internet]. Available from: http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_final_report.pdf
27.
Muriel Lightbourne, Graham Dutfield. Review of Literature: Law [Internet]. Available from: http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_legal_literature_review.pdf
28.
Dr Dwijen Rangnekar. Review of Literature: Economics [Internet]. Available from: http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_economic_literature_review.pdf
29.
Country case studies: Bulgaria [Internet]. Available from: http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_bulgaria_case_study.pdf
30.
Muriel Lightbourne, Lois Muraguri. Country case studies: China [Internet]. Available from: http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_china_case_study.pdf
31.
Muriel Lightbourne. Country case studies: Ethiopia [Internet]. Available from: http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_ethiopia_case_study.pdf
32.
Dr Dwijen Rangnekar. Country case studies: India [Internet]. Available from: http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_india_case_study.pdf
33.
Dr Dwijen Rangnekar. Country case studies: Kenya [Internet]. Available from: http://www.ecologic.de/download/projekte/1800-1849/1802/wp6_kenya_case_study.pdf
34.
Mr. Ivan Ivanov, Dr. Burcak Yildiz *, Mrs.Ofelia Tsonkova, Mrs. Tatiana Mateeva. Country case studies: Turkey [Internet]. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 1992;7:74–104. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2006;29:413–53. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 1998;39:143–94. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2007;31:539–68. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2014;19(3):359–83. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/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 [Internet]. 2013;44(4):392–417. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2003;66(1):33–74. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2002;212–25. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2006;40. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2013;35(7):402–14. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2003;66(1):463–83. Available from: http://0-www.jstor.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/stable/20059182
47.
Lawrence Liang. Porous Legalities and Avenues of Participation [Internet]. Vol. 5, Sarai Reader. p. 6–17. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2007;66(3):625–56. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2006;28(12):617–24. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2007;29(1):15–21. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2002;51(6):1783–801. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2001;87(5):813–920. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2010;10(1):19–55. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2007;18(2):337–65. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/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 [Internet]. 2005;26(4):623–92. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2007;29(5):172–9. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2006;69:70–91. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 13(2). Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2011;43(9):2043–59. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/10.1068/a43259
62.
Madhavi Sunder. The Invention of Traditional Knowledge. Law and Contemporary Problems [Internet]. 2007;70(2):97–124. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 23(3):267–80. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2008;39(1):35–50. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2011;20(1):47–61. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/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 [Internet]. 2005;1(1):35–52. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/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 [Internet]. 2011;33(4):238–44. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2010;19(2):150–73. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/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 [Internet]. 2013;9(2). Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2005;8(6):761–96. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/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 [Internet]. 2008;117(5):804–85. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2000;53:2219–39. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2008;22(1):97–113. Available from: http://0-doi.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/10.1080/13600820701740753
77.
Yu, Peter K. Tale of Two Development Agendas, A. Ohio Northern University Law Review [Internet]. 2009;35:465–573. Available from: http://0-heinonline.org.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/onulr35&id=469&collection=journals&index=journals/onulr#469
