With globalization, the issue of intellectual property rights has taken on great importance. The Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) introduced intellectual property issues into the economy. Since then, intellectual property rights related to information and communication technologies, counterfeiting and the protection of innovation have become another issue of multilateral and bilateral agreements. One attempt at a multilateral agreement is the Anti-Counterfeiting Agreement (ACTA), which sets out specific criminal obligations to protect intellectual property rights and prevent counterfeiting of generic goods and medicines and internet piracy. The agreement negotiated in great secrecy met with considerable opposition and the European Parliament was motivated to reject it in July 2012. For their part, emerging economies fear the changes to multilateral rules that this agreement would entail. The main obstacles to the agreement come from sectors that might feel lost in this process and from groups opposed to free trade and globalisation. The winners of such an agreement are small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), consumers and citizens, who will benefit from increased competition, productivity and lower consumer prices. These increases mean more disposable income and higher wages, without giving up sustainable development and more social and environmental protection. The dilemma is not whether the agreement will be reached or not. Not signing it does not mean maintaining the status quo, but leaving the future of the EU in a position of great weakness vis-à-vis the world`s two major economies, the United States and China. The decision of the EU governments and the European Parliament is above all strategic. At present, more than 2,000 FIPs have been signed between developed and developing countries.
In Germany, 132 bilateral investment agreements are in force. This is what makes the critics of TTIP in Germany argue that it is a superfluous instrument without taking into account its necessity for other EU Member States and the improvement it represents compared to other existing bilateral agreements. Controversial ISDS is two in terms of improvement over FIPs. Firstly, thanks to the Treaty of Lisbon, a single agreement will make it possible to resolve the differences between investors and the host State, whether the investor is from an EU Member State and the host State is the United States or, on the contrary, whether the investor is from the United States and the host Member State of an EU Member State.