The US concern
With markets in the developed world becoming saturated, multinational drug companies are increasingly looking to emerging economies with large populations for sales expansion and growth.
Powerful pharma lobbies are alleging that India is running riot over intellectual property rights. They feel that a poor IP framework can impede the development of new medicines over the long term by creating an environment that all together stop the pharmaceutical industry from investing in innovation.
They feel that Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act undermines innovation. It disallows much of the incremental innovation done on existing treatments from being patented in India. At the same time they point out that it is incremental innovation that has delivered outstanding benefits to patients the world over—whether in the treatment of HIV/AIDS or drugs developed for malaria and other tropical diseases.
The Indian viewpoint
With calls in the US for designating India a priority foreign country (PFC), the worst downgrading of status by the US trade representative for inability to protect IPRs, the Indian government is accusing US authorities of intimidating the Union health ministry over the issue of compulsory licences.
A PFC tag can allow the US to impose unilateral sanctions against India for domestic laws which deny benefits to the US under any trade agreement. According to some officials there seems to be a two-fold agenda behind the "cacophony" emanating from the US.
While pressure is being created on India's health ministry to not consider drugs for compulsory licences , there is also a deliberate attempt to use India to scare away other developing countries like Indonesia and Brazil from introducing legislation to prevent ever-greening of drug patents, like section 3 (d) of Indian Patents Act (IPA),according to a report
With markets in the developed world becoming saturated, multinational drug companies are increasingly looking to emerging economies with large populations for sales expansion and growth.
Powerful pharma lobbies are alleging that India is running riot over intellectual property rights. They feel that a poor IP framework can impede the development of new medicines over the long term by creating an environment that all together stop the pharmaceutical industry from investing in innovation.
They feel that Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act undermines innovation. It disallows much of the incremental innovation done on existing treatments from being patented in India. At the same time they point out that it is incremental innovation that has delivered outstanding benefits to patients the world over—whether in the treatment of HIV/AIDS or drugs developed for malaria and other tropical diseases.
The Indian viewpoint
With calls in the US for designating India a priority foreign country (PFC), the worst downgrading of status by the US trade representative for inability to protect IPRs, the Indian government is accusing US authorities of intimidating the Union health ministry over the issue of compulsory licences.
A PFC tag can allow the US to impose unilateral sanctions against India for domestic laws which deny benefits to the US under any trade agreement. According to some officials there seems to be a two-fold agenda behind the "cacophony" emanating from the US.
While pressure is being created on India's health ministry to not consider drugs for compulsory licences , there is also a deliberate attempt to use India to scare away other developing countries like Indonesia and Brazil from introducing legislation to prevent ever-greening of drug patents, like section 3 (d) of Indian Patents Act (IPA),according to a report
No comments:
Post a Comment