This article posits that Australia, as an affluent country with increasing capacity to manufacture vaccines, has an obligation to assist its regional (and global) counterparts in implementing vaccination programs that protect their populations. First, the article explores the capacity of high-income nations to meet their obligations, assist their neighbours and refrain from vaccine nationalism. This inquiry involves an analysis of the optimal ethical strategy for distributing vaccines globally, and the role that Australia might play in this distribution strategy. Secondly, the article examines the intellectual property landscape for vaccines in Australia, focusing on the patents that cover vaccine compositions and manufacturing techniques (recognizing the potential for know-how and access to materials as well as patents to affect manufacturing capacity). This article then discusses the strategies the Australian Government has at its disposal to counter potential intellectual property impediments whilst complying with existing obligations under the Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), as an ethically appropriate response to the pandemic. This article also considers whether a so-called TRIPS waiver could provide better options and concludes that the challenge of compelling disclosure of know-how remains.

中文翻译：

---

知识产权的道德法律评估及其对 COVID-19 疫苗分发的影响：澳大利亚案例研究

本文假设澳大利亚作为一个生产疫苗能力不断提高的富裕国家，有义务协助其区域（和全球）同行实施保护其人口的疫苗接种计划。首先，本文探讨了高收入国家履行义务、帮助邻国和避免疫苗民族主义的能力。该调查涉及对全球分发疫苗的最佳道德策略以及澳大利亚在该分发策略中可能发挥的作用的分析。其次，本文考察了澳大利亚疫苗的知识产权格局，专注于涵盖疫苗成分和制造技术的专利（认识到技术诀窍和获得材料的潜力以及影响制造能力的专利）。然后，本文讨论了澳大利亚政府在遵守《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》(TRIPS) 规定的现有义务的同时应对潜在知识产权障碍的策略，作为对这一流行病的道德上适当的回应。本文还考虑了所谓的 TRIPS 豁免是否可以提供更好的选择，并得出结论认为，令人信服地披露专有技术的挑战仍然存在。然后，本文讨论了澳大利亚政府在遵守《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》(TRIPS) 规定的现有义务的同时应对潜在知识产权障碍的策略，作为对这一流行病的道德上适当的回应。本文还考虑了所谓的 TRIPS 豁免是否可以提供更好的选择，并得出结论认为，令人信服地披露专有技术的挑战仍然存在。然后，本文讨论了澳大利亚政府在遵守《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》(TRIPS) 规定的现有义务的同时应对潜在知识产权障碍的策略，作为对这一流行病的道德上适当的回应。本文还考虑了所谓的 TRIPS 豁免是否可以提供更好的选择，并得出结论认为，令人信服地披露专有技术的挑战仍然存在。