Article XXIII of GATT 1994 allows WTO Members to lodge complaints about measures taken by other Members that nullifies or affects benefits granted under a WTO agreement, even if such measures are not contrary to the provisions of the Agreement or are due to “any other situation” (“non-violation and situation” or “NVNI”). However, Article 64(2) of the TRIPS Agreement provides that complaints of non-violation and situation `shall not apply to the settlement of disputes under that Agreement for a period of five years from the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement`. (a) arising from international agreements on mutual legal assistance or application of a general nature which are not particularly limited to the protection of intellectual property; The obligations under Articles 3 and 4 shall not apply to procedures under multilateral agreements concluded under the auspices of WIPO concerning the acquisition or maintenance of intellectual property rights. (d) arising from international agreements for the protection of intellectual property which entered into force before the entry into force of the WTO Agreement, provided that such agreements are notified to the Ad Hoc Council and do not constitute arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination against nationals of other Members. The TRIPS Agreement is an agreement on minimum standards that allows members to guarantee, if they so wish, broader protection of intellectual property. Members are free to determine the appropriate method for implementing the provisions of the Agreement in their own legal and practical order. The WTO decision of August 2003 will enter into force until a formal amendment to the ad hoc agreement, which will contain its content, is made. Negotiations on the amendments began for the first time in November 2003 and were to be completed by June 2004. However, differences of opinion between developing and developing members on the nature and extent of such a change led to the continuation of negotiations until the Hong Kong ministerial meeting in December 2005. This bilateral pressure (z.B. under the U.S. Trade Representative`s Special 301 process) or multilateral (smaller and competing trade agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), has multiplied in recent years due to an effective failure of wto negotiations, which ended further progress in their latest round of negotiations, the Doha Development Round. TRIPS conditions that impose more standards beyond TRIPS were also discussed.
 These free trade agreements contain conditions that limit the ability of governments to create competition for generic drug manufacturers. In particular, the United States has been criticized for promoting protection far beyond the standards prescribed by TRIPS. . . .