Background: Use of snus and snus-like nicotine products is increasing, in particular among young people, in several Nordic countries and Estonia, while snus is legally on the market only in Sweden and Norway. Snus is available in a great variety of tastes and packaging particularly catering for young users. Recently, strong snus-resembling nicotine pouches have emerged on the market. This research investigates the regulatory means to counteract this development. Methods: European Union (EU) and national tobacco control legislation, case law of the European Court of Justice (CJEU) and relevant public health studies are analysed. Results: The research finds that the judgement of the CJEU relating to the sale of snus on Finnish ferries has not been enforced. Permitted large traveller imports for personal use have contributed to wide availability of snus in Finland. Even if the legislation in Sweden is in conformity with the exemption it obtained in the Accession Treaty, the public health impact of snus use for young people in its neighbouring countries has become considerable. Nicotine pouches, -which are not regarded as medical products in terms of medicine legislation, lack harmonised EU-wide regulation. Controlling smuggling across open borders is challenging. Conclusions: The legislation at the EU and national levels should be able to protect young people from new tobacco and nicotine products. It is urgent to harmonise regulation relating to new tobacco and nicotine products taking as a base a high level of protection of health as required in the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU.

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.

No abstract