Re: The Problem is not Belarus, it is WIPO
Absolutely correct.
"Intellectual property" (IP) is a specious concept, that being so at inception of IP laws, but only becoming obvious upon advent of the digital era.
At present Belarus, Russia too according to a recent report on RT, is making sensible pragmatic response to USA 'sanctions diplomacy'.
However, this potentially runs more deeply. That nations are willing to flout the letter of international convention on so-called IP, even temporarily so, indicates willingness to think outside a box imposed in the 18th century UK during the reign of Queen Anne. Principles underlying the Statute of Queen Anne (1710) were later adopted elsewhere and eventually incorporated into international conventions. These conventions were set in aspic long before many now extant nations, particularly in the 'Global South', had attained independence from various sources of colonial rule.
Many nations pay fees to rentiers in order to access knowledge, culture, and products of technology. These fees, incorporated into the prices of goods and services provided by IP monopoly protected enterprise are a drain on discretionary expenditure of nations, and that of individuals within nations: resource which instead could support local intellectual endeavour, cultural innovation, and application of knowledge currently shrouded by patents (e.g. manufacture of pharmaceuticals).
Nations now rebelling against Western hegemony (particularly that exercised by the USA using economic and military means) ought now consider the 'Economic Warfare Nuclear Option' of disavowing the notion of ideas, their promulgation, and their application being 'property'.
Notional losses accrued by titular 'owners' of ideas (i.e. supposed IP) within dissenting nations would be swamped by gains from unfettered knowledge acquired from elsewhere. There would be global intellectual/cultural renaissance. Once one or more major nations inaccessible to US Marines take this option, then inevitably, like a cascade of falling dominoes, it will encircle the globe.
What of lost 'ownership' of ideas? How shall the (truly) creative survive?
Simply, they shall survive in an open market for imagination and requisite skills to apply it. Skills rather than end-products shall draw income. Support will come from voluntary patronage.
What's on offer is a genuinely open market for creative inspiration leading to ideas and applications thereof, this replacing that of arbitrarily priced end-products of intangible nature (e.g. represented as sequences of binary digits). Reputation shall be the currency of sellers in this market. Reputation will be protected by entitlement to attribution, plus legal remedy against attempts at false representation.