The Capture of International Intellectual Property Law through the U.S. Trade Regime

Margot E. Kaminski

Ohio State University (OSU) - Michael E. Moritz College of Law; Yale University - Yale Information Society Project; Yale University - Law School

June 10, 2014

Southern California Law Review, 2014 Forthcoming

For years, the United States has included intellectual property (“IP”) law in its free trade agreements. This Article finds that the IP law in recent U.S. free trade agreements differs subtly but significantly from U.S. IP law. These differences are not the result of deliberate government choices, but of the capture of the U.S. trade regime.

A growing number of voices has publicly criticized the lack of transparency and democratic accountability in the trade agreement negotiating process. But legal scholarship largely praises the “fast track” trade negotiating system. This Article reorients the debate over the trade negotiating process away from discussions of democratic accountability to focus instead on the problem of regulatory capture. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) is exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act and functionally exempt from the bulk of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. As a result, the USTR is likely to be captured by private parties through information asymmetry and to negotiate against the public good. Subject matter areas that are subject to collective action problems, such as intellectual property law, are particularly likely to be captured in the USTR.

The institutional capture of the USTR has affected the substance of exported IP law. Negotiators are tasked with exporting U.S. law, but deliver the law in versions favorable to vested interests. Negotiators change unfavorable domestic rules into more pliable international standards, codify favorable domestic judicial interpretations as international rules, and omit parts of domestic law that balance IP protection against other values. These distortions arise because the USTR engages in “regulatory paraphrasing”: it paraphrases the current state of U.S. law rather than exporting the words of U.S. statutes. This Article identifies examples of this captured paraphrasing, explores its domestic and international consequences, and proposes that Congress reinstate Federal Advisory Committee Act requirements to prevent this capture from continuing.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 76

Keywords: Intellectual Property, International Intellectual Property, Copyright, Trade

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: November 15, 2013 ; Last revised: January 1, 2015

Suggested Citation

Kaminski, Margot E., The Capture of International Intellectual Property Law through the U.S. Trade Regime (June 10, 2014). Southern California Law Review, 2014 Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2354324

Contact Information

Margot E. Kaminski (Contact Author)
Ohio State University (OSU) - Michael E. Moritz College of Law ( email )
55 West 12th Avenue
Columbus, OH 43210
United States

Yale University - Yale Information Society Project ( email )
127 Wall Street
New Haven, CT 06511
United States
Yale University - Law School ( email )
P.O. Box 208215
New Haven, CT 06520-8215
United States

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 5,902
Downloads: 508
Download Rank: 41,859