Since the TRIPS agreement came into force, it has been criticized by developing countries, scientists and non-governmental organizations. While some of this criticism is generally opposed to the WTO, many proponents of trade liberalization also view TRIPS policy as a bad policy. The effects of the concentration of WEALTH of TRIPS (money from people in developing countries for copyright and patent holders in industrialized countries) and the imposition of artificial shortages on citizens of countries that would otherwise have had weaker intellectual property laws are common bases for such criticisms. Other critics have focused on the inability of trips trips to accelerate the flow of investment and technology to low-income countries, a benefit that WTO members achieved prior to the creation of the agreement. The World Bank`s statements indicate that TRIPS have clearly not accelerated investment in low-income countries, whereas they may have done so for middle-income countries.  As part of TRIPS, long periods of patent validity were examined to determine the excessive slowdown in generic drug entry and competition. In particular, the illegality of preclinical testing or the presentation of samples to be authorized until a patent expires have been accused of encouraging the growth of certain multinationals and not producers in developing countries. The actual copyright and patent standards of the TRIPS agreement come largely from other sources. As far as copyright is concerned, the Berne Convention is the source of most OF the TRIPS provisions. The main areas in which TRIPS expands Bernese copyright provisions are the explicit protection of software and databases. Similarly, the Paris Convention provides the source of patent adhesive provisions, to which TRIPS mainly add rules of application. The Berne and Paris Conventions are managed by WIPO.
With the TRIPS agreement, intellectual property rights have been integrated into the multilateral trading system for the first time and remains the most comprehensive multilateral IP agreement to date. In 2001, developing countries, fearing that developed countries had insisted on too narrow a reading of the TRIPS trip, launched a series of discussions that culminated in the Doha Declaration. The Doha Declaration is a WTO DECLARATION that clarifies the scope of the TRIPS agreement, which states, for example, that TRIPS can and should be interpreted in light of the objective of “promoting access to medicines for all”. The 2002 Doha Declaration confirmed that the TRIPS agreement should not prevent members from taking the necessary steps to protect public health. Despite this recognition, less developed countries have argued that flexible TRIPS provisions, such as mandatory licensing, are almost impossible to obtain. The least developed countries, in particular, have made their young domestic manufacturing and technological industries proof of the infallible policy. Article 10 of the agreement states that “1. Computer programs, whether in the source code or in the object code, must be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971). (2) The compilation of data or any other material, whether machine-readable or in any other form, constituting spiritual creations because of the choice or disposition of their content, must be protected as such. Such protection, which does not cover the data or material itself, does not affect the copyrights that exist in the data or materials themselves.
At the time of the negotiations, developing countries strongly opposed TRIPS because they saw it as a breach of their flexibility to develop copyright laws and patents that best match their economies and cultures.