平行进口法律(外文翻译).docx

译文（字数 3179）：

随着世界贸易组织（WTO）的建立，使得在降低关税和限制贸易保护的规定出台，专利平行进口的合法性和品牌药物已成为WTO成员国之间越来越有争议的问题。减少和取消关税和贸易壁垒产生的条件，鼓励这些药品的平行进口。此外，与贸易有关的知识产权协定（TRIPS协议）允许成员国建立和权利用尽的相关的法律和规则，在不能质疑WTO争端解决制度下，成员国之间需要协调和政策辩论。

因为他们的专利和品牌的药物是有争议的平行进口问题。第一，有两个主要的公共政策目标之间的内在冲突：（1）成员国的新药物的创新和发展，（2）成员国的卫生保健系统和宽带接入现有药品的短期成本控制策略。因此，对于双方的经济和法律学者，专利和品牌药品平行进口应是专利法规定的问题已成为一个充满激情的政策辩论。这个问题可能在世界规范和国际贸易的结果中，可能对未来仍较突出的学术发展和消费者福利的讨论过程中有显着的影响。今天，大部分的辩论有关的协调的权利用尽原则和平行进口法律围绕的意愿和偏好的成员国改变各自的平行进口的法律规范体系以促进共同利益。

外文原文（字符数 11712）：

Parallel imports of patented and branded drugs are controversial because their

consumer welfare effects are generally ambiguous. First, there is an inherent

conflict between two major public-policy objectives: (i) innovation and development

of new drugs and (ii) short-run cost-containment strategies for the health care system

and broad access to existing medicines. Therefore, the question whether parallel

imports of patented and branded drugs should be regulated under the patent laws

has become a matter of passionate policy debate among both economic and legal

scholars. This question is likely to remain prominent in future discussions of IP

norms and international trade and the outcome may have significant consequences

for the process of academic development and consumer welfare. Today, much of the

debate regarding the harmonisation of ‘principle of exhaustion’ and parallel import

laws revolves around the willingness and preferences of Member States to change

their respective parallel import laws to conform to a uniform system in attempt to

advance the common good.