Pharma And ‘Unethical’ Patent Lobbying In India
10 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // March 19th, 2010 // 7:03 am
A controversy has erupted in recent weeks in India, where consumer activists are arguing that intellectual property conferences sponsored by drugmakers, law firms and others are little more than gussied up opportunities to lobby India’s judges and policy makers. In their view, these IP summits, which are organized by the George Washingtong University Law School, are attempts to influence sitting judges on patent law enforcement issues that are pending in Indian courts.
“These meetings are being used as forums by companies to promote their intellectual property and to lobby for either law amendments or even to plead their cases currently pending before, for instance, the Indian Patent Office,” more than 20 consumer groups and non-governmental organizations wrote in a Feb. 26 letter to Shri Anand Sharma, India’s Minister of Commerce and Industry. They cite Novartis and Gilead as both sponsors and companies with pending patent disputes.
One example that raised their ire: Gilead, which is fighting a rejection of the patent on its Tenofovir AIDS drug by the Indian Patent Office, closed its presentation at a recent summit with this warning: “The licensing model — Gilead licenses its patents to generic firms — is at risk and the decision by the IPAB (Intellectual Property Appellate Board) will send a powerful signal about prospects for tech transfer partnerships with Indian companies.”
In raising their concerns, the groups argue the real fight is over access to affordable and essential medicines, and the extent to which India not only conforms to World Trade Organization rules, but demands beyond international law. In their view, the posture adopted by the drugmakers and their supporters is to “force India to adopt greater standards” of IP protection “beyond the mandatory levels” required by the WTO. “This is aimed at preventing the domestic production, registration and export of essential medicines by Indian generic manufacturers,” they wrote.
david egilman md mph
Microsoft is supporting this too. On one hand Gates funds access to HIV, TB and malaria drugs on the other his company fights access to these drugs.
patrons99
Pharma, Gates, and his foundation, are VERY conflicted. He should stick to enjoying his retirement. His philanthropy does not ring true…smells of ulterior motives. It’s as if he’s preparing the world for his heirs. He’s probably going to have his body put into a deep freeze with cryogens, so as to be thawed-out in an even “better” world of the future. Typical NWO agenda.
Christopher
Damned if you do and damned if you don’t. The Gates foundation contributed around $9 billion in grants to healthcare between 1998 and 2007. I’m sure there are ways in which some of that money could be used better, but as far as showing commitment to public private partnerships it’s not a bad start I think. Of course there will always be critics and naysayers but actions speak louder than words.
The story here I thought was about pharma companies seeking some form of protection for their intellectual property in one of the world’s largest markets. Gilead’s wording might be construed as provocative but it is clear and not an unreasonable commercial position.
Pharma companies are begining to get it and devoting more effort to emerging markets and diseases. For commercial benefit without doubt but making some progress from earlier years when these countries were considered unviable. As more collaborations develop - inter-company and in public private alliances, more patients will have access to needed drugs. It’s not perfect by any means but it is improving. But it can’t involve companies willingly throwing away their valuable commercial assets just because there is publicpressure to do more.
foln16
This is not about pharma companies seeking “some form of protection” in India. They have protection in India, just not as much as they want. That’s an important difference. Specifically, this whole thing is about pharma companies seeking to eliminate a specific clause of Indian patent law that denies patents to modifications of existing molecules and drugs that Indian patent system (examiners, courts) regard as lacking novelty.
Christopher
Semantics maybe, but thanks for the clarification. If such a modifications did lead to new ‘local’ patents wouldn’t the result still be the same? I’m neither pro nor anti pharma but I couldn’t imagine any business not looking to protect valuable assets where possible.
patrons99
Related to this thread, there is presently a Novartis Boycott Campaign and a Petition Against Novartis. It would be interesting to put this petition to a vote on this board. Would you sign the Petition Against Novartis?
http://novartisboycott.org/about/
http://novartisboycott.org/petition/
“As you might be aware, Novartis, a Swiss Multinational pharmaceutical company operating in India, has been involved in challenging the laws of our country through two petitions filed in the Chennai High Court. These petitions are about Novartis attempt to get patent for the beta crystalline form of imatinib mesylate, a very effective medicine used in the treatment of chronic myeloid leukaemia. In addition to Novartis, several Indian companies viz. NATCO, Cipla, Ranbaxy and Hetero also produce and market the drug. Treatment with Gleevec (manufactured and marketed by Novartis) costs Rupees 1.2 lakh per month, whereas the same drug is marketed by Indian companies at a cost of about Rs. 8,000 per month. If a patent were to be granted to Novartis for imatinib mesylate, Indian companies would be forced to stop production of the drug.”
“The huge difference in the price of the same drug is an illustration of how a patent monopoly can be used by drug companies to generate super-profits while endangering the lives of thousands, or even millions. Clearly, the challenges posed by Novartis to the Indian law constitute an attempt to profiteer at the expense of tens of thousands of poor and sick patients. It is also an attempt to open the floodgates for other drug companies so that they to can apply for trivial patents. The consequences will not be limited just to India. Today India is known globally as the Pharmacy of the Third World, because Indian companies export cheaper versions of patented drugs to over 150 countries. For example, over half the medicines currently used for AIDS treatment in developing countries come from India. If Indian companies are to be prevented from making generic versions of patented drugs, tens of thousands of poor patients in Africa, Asia and Latin America will be denied access to essential medicines. In spite of many appeals from people all over the world, Novartis however continues to pursue the court cases vigorously.”
“We appeal to all doctors and you to sign the petition that urges Novartis to desist from jeopardizing the lives of countless poor and sick people.”
patrons99
David Egilman, M.D., M.P.H - There is a wolf in sheep’s clothing that poses great risk to our survival. The GAVI Alliance should not be making decisions as to global health policy. The number of COIs in the GAVI Alliance are legion and certainly too numerous to count.
Why should anyone not be categorically opposed to the likes of Bill Gates making ANY health decisions on their behalf? What medical or public health training does he have?
“Launched in 2000, the GAVI Alliance is a global health partnership representing stakeholders in immunization from both private and public sectors: developing world and donor governments, private sector philanthropists such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the financial community, developed and developing country vaccine manufacturers, research and technical institutes, civil society organisations and multilateral organisations like the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the World Bank.”
The pharma-driven approach to treating dis-ease and preventive health may be completely wrong. Pasteur’s Germ Theory and Koch’s Postulates may be wrong. Bacteria, bacteriophages, and viruses are virtually certain to win this battle. Multi-drug resistant infections are now more common than ever before in history. Our natural immunity has been increasingly battered by indiscriminate antibiotic use and the stupendous vaccine schedules, from cradle to grave.
See an article of March 16, 2010, by Shearer JC, Stack ML, Richmond MR, Bear AP, Hajjeh RA, et al. (2010) Accelerating Policy Decisions to Adopt Haemophilus influenzae Type b Vaccine: A Global, Multivariable Analysis. PLoS Med 7(3): e1000249. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000249
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000249#pmed-1000249-t001
This article discloses funding by the GAVI Alliance. This disclosure pretty much says it all.
http://www.gavialliance.org/
http://www.gavialliance.org/about/in_partnership/index.php
The GAVI Alliance does not have OUR best interests at heart. It’s time we woke up! Are we content with being lemmings or hapless gulls, inadvertently preparing for “mass suicide” and extinction?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemming
SKR
I have been an attendee to 2 of this annual shows..
These shows reek of PHRMA PR.
Anonymous Analogous
if you are interested in having a look at the “valuable assets” according to USPTO please visit http://www.ipwatchdog.com/obscure-patents/
:-) novelty = Semantics …….pathologically Novel ideas…
patrons99
An article titled “Infectious diseases and the colonised mind” by K.S. Jacob on March 25, 2010, is an interesting read.
http://www.thehindu.com/2010/03/25/stories/2010032553601000.htm