Comments on: A New US Trade Rep And Compulsory Licensing http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/12/a-new-us-trade-rep-and-compulsory-licensing/ News, Comment and Conversation Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:11:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Michael http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/12/a-new-us-trade-rep-and-compulsory-licensing/#comment-383714 Michael Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:19:40 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=18243#comment-383714 The point is that compulsory licenses, while often times seemingly well meaning, lead to problematic consequences. The truth of the matter is that drug companies would be happy to supply African countries with all the drugs they need at next to no cost . . . IF the companies had assurance that the drugs would go to treat the intended population within the country. Unfortunately that isn't the case. And when people in these needy countries divert drugs away to other European countries FOR A PROFIT, they are taking ADDITIONAL money away from the drug companies - the money the companies would've had if they would've sold the Europeans the drugs themselves. Another news story does a better job of explaining the above quoted story from the UK: http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/10-3-2002-27507.asp The point is that compulsory licenses, while often times seemingly well meaning, lead to problematic consequences. The truth of the matter is that drug companies would be happy to supply African countries with all the drugs they need at next to no cost . . . IF the companies had assurance that the drugs would go to treat the intended population within the country. Unfortunately that isn’t the case. And when people in these needy countries divert drugs away to other European countries FOR A PROFIT, they are taking ADDITIONAL money away from the drug companies - the money the companies would’ve had if they would’ve sold the Europeans the drugs themselves.

Another news story does a better job of explaining the above quoted story from the UK:
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/10-3-2002-27507.asp

]]> By: Bingo http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/12/a-new-us-trade-rep-and-compulsory-licensing/#comment-383711 Bingo Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:55:41 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=18243#comment-383711 BTW, the previous post was referring to the article cited by Michael. BTW, the previous post was referring to the article cited by Michael.

]]> By: Bingo http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/12/a-new-us-trade-rep-and-compulsory-licensing/#comment-383710 Bingo Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:50:22 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=18243#comment-383710 How does the cited article relate to compulsory licenses and support your suggestion that governments are likely to abuse them for profit? The article mentions only actions by companies, not governments. "GSK was criticised by Judge Peter Prescott in pre-trial hearings, who said he was surprised that the company had supplied medicines to commercial organisations "without taking any precautions to see that the medicines really did arrive in, and stay in, west Africa"." How does the cited article relate to compulsory licenses and support your suggestion that governments are likely to abuse them for profit?

The article mentions only actions by companies, not governments.

“GSK was criticised by Judge Peter Prescott in pre-trial hearings, who said he was surprised that the company had supplied medicines to commercial organisations “without taking any precautions to see that the medicines really did arrive in, and stay in, west Africa”.”

]]> By: Michael http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/12/a-new-us-trade-rep-and-compulsory-licensing/#comment-383692 Michael Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:32:45 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=18243#comment-383692 I just hope that he keeps in mind . . . there are a number of problems with compulsory licenses. How should a company be "reasonably" compensated? How should the use of the medicines produced be enforced? Many less-than-honest governments would be glad to accept low cost medicines produced by a compulsory licensee only to go and sell the drugs to a higher bidder and not use the drugs for the benefit of the country's population. See, for example: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/apr/25/internationalaidanddevelopment.aids I just hope that he keeps in mind . . . there are a number of problems with compulsory licenses. How should a company be “reasonably” compensated? How should the use of the medicines produced be enforced? Many less-than-honest governments would be glad to accept low cost medicines produced by a compulsory licensee only to go and sell the drugs to a higher bidder and not use the drugs for the benefit of the country’s population.

See, for example: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/apr/25/internationalaidanddevelopment.aids

]]>