A 2003 agreement eased the requirements of the domestic market and allows developing countries to export to other countries where there is a national health problem as long as the exported medicines are not part of a trade or industrial policy.  Drugs exported under such a regime may be packaged or coloured differently to prevent them from harming the markets of industrialized countries. In addition to the basic intellectual property standards established by the TRIPS Agreement, many nations have engaged in bilateral agreements to introduce a higher level of protection. This collection of standards, known as TRIPS+ or TRIPS-Plus, can take many forms.  The general objectives of these agreements are as follows: the 2002 Doha Declaration confirmed that the TRIPS Agreement should not prevent Members from taking the necessary measures to protect public health. Despite this recognition, less developed countries have argued that flexible TRIPS provisions, such as compulsory licensing, are almost impossible to enforce. Less developed countries, in particular, cited their young domestic manufacturing and technology industries as evidence of the imprecision of the policy. Unlike other intellectual property agreements, TRIPS has an effective enforcement mechanism. States can be disciplined by the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. Malaysia is a party to the most well-known ip international agreement, including: since the entry into force of TRIPS, it has been the subject of criticism from developing countries, academics and non-governmental organizations. While some of this criticism is directed at the WTO in general, many proponents of trade liberalization also see TRIPS as bad policy.
The wealth concentration effects of TRIPS (the movement of money from people in developing countries to copyright and patent holders in developed countries) and the imposition of artificial shortages on citizens of countries that would otherwise have weaker intellectual property laws are common bases for such criticism. Other criticisms focused on TRIPS` failure to accelerate the flow of investment and technology to low-income countries, an advantage advanced by WTO members before the agreement was created. World Bank statements indicate that TRIPS has not been able to tangibly accelerate investment in low-income countries, although this has been done for middle-income countries.  The long periods of validity of patents under TRIPS have been examined to indicate that they excessively slow down market entry for generic drug substitutes and competition in the market. In particular, the illegality of preclinical studies or the filing of samples for approval until a patent expires has been held responsible for the growth of a few multinationals and not producers in developing countries. The Agreement on trade aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPS) is an international agreement between all member states of the World Trade Organization (WTO). It establishes minimum standards for the regulation of different forms of intellectual property (IP) by national governments, as applied to nationals of other WTO member countries.  TRIPS was negotiated at the end of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) between 1989 and 1990 and is managed by the WTO. . . .