Today it is widely recognized that a uniform global intellectual property (IP) system requiring a high level of protection is inherently unjust and affects countries differently depending upon their level of technological and economic development. This article analyzes the functioning of the current international treaty framework having intellectual property connections--the TRIPS (Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) Agreement, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the Convention on Biological Diversity, bilateral trade and investment agreement and UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions--from the perspective of how it could promote a more socially and economically just international intellectual property framework. The article also brings forth some new initiatives which have been proposed to address some of the most critical issues related to the current system: providing an alternative to a patent-driven inventive system for medical research and development and a treaty proposal for access to knowledge and technology. The article points out that the problems faced by developing countries with regard to, for example, access to medicines, can be similar to those faced by those developed countries that are net importers of patented medicines. The main message of this article is that it is no longer possible to maintain a unitary IP system at the international level without grave economic and social losses to, in particular, developing countries. What is needed is a more fragmentary IP protection framework making it possible for each country to adapt it to its national level of economic, technological and social development. (Contains 17 notes.)