SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Briefs

Inside Views

Contribute your views! Submit an Inside Views idea to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch.

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

Call For Transparency In The Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiation

In this post, three US law professors explain a recent call by over 30 legal scholars for the US Trade Representative to increase transparency for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement intellectual property chapter, and their response to Ambassador Kirk’s response that he is “strongly offended” by the suggestion that the negotiation is not adequately transparent already.





Latest Comments
  • Congratulations upon re-election;-WHO chief.Priori... »
  • Great article. Ms. Chan may want to read our book ... »

  • For IPW Subscribers
    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >

    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >


    Indonesia Strives To Acquire Bird Flu Medicines Despite No Patent

    Published on 5 July 2006 @ 4:09 pm

    By for Intellectual Property Watch

    With eight recently confirmed cases of avian influenza, Indonesia is scrambling to build up its stockpile of medicines. The preferred product to fight bird flu in humans is not under patent in Indonesia, which raises questions as to why production has been off to a slow start in the country.

    Roche, the Swiss producer of the preferred treatment, Tamiflu (oseltamivir), has developed partnerships to increase worldwide supply. But none of these partnerships are in Indonesia, and although local companies have shown interest, there is only one government-owned generics company, Indo Farma, producing oseltamivir at the moment.

    Roche has indicated to the Indonesian government that they are free to produce since it is unpatented, but that without a patent, it would take two to three years to develop production capabilities. But Indo Farma is beginning production this year, according to officials.

    But even Indo Farma is importing oseltamivir from the company Hetero in India, with whom Roche has a license deal, showing that despite the absence of a patent in Indonesia, the country’s stockpiling may rely directly or indirectly on Roche.

    Of the eight people affected in Indonesia, seven died and it is believed that it involves human-to-human transmission of the H5N1 virus, a World Health Organization (WHO) spokesperson told Intellectual Property Watch.

    Such transmissions have taken place before in Hong Kong, Thailand and Vietnam, but the recent case in Indonesia is “certainly the largest cluster” of people seen so far, he said.

    The spokesperson also said that considering that avian influenza is widespread in Indonesia, plus that “the control is not satisfactory,” and the number of poultry and the size of the country, one would expect that Indonesia will soon bypass Vietnam in having the highest number of human deaths from avian influenza. The likelihood of transmission is high in Indonesia, but the risk of spreading from poultry to human is still low, the spokesperson said. So far Vietnam has 42 confirmed human deaths from bird flu, according to the WHO.

    Indonesia, with a population of some 220 million, needs and will continue to need medicines.

    Lily Sriwahyuni, spokesperson for the Indonesian health ministry, told Intellectual Property Watch that at the moment “Indonesia and other countries may produce oseltamivir without a patent,” and that the ministry of health “has committed to prepare 12 million oseltamivir capsules in 2006,” which is well below the country’s potential needs.

    The government has purchased five million capsules imported by Indo Farma produced by India’s Hetero under license from Roche, and Indo Farma expects to produce another five million by the end of 2006, Sriwahyuni said. Indonesia also is in the process of getting two million capsules from Roche directly in an “ongoing process,” she said.

    In 2005, Indonesia had some 24,750 capsules of Tamiflu of which 3,800 were donated by the WHO; 500,000 by the Australian overseas development programme, AusAID/WHO; 50,000 capsules from the sales and distribution company Tempo; and 10,000 capsules donated by Taiwan. These were distributed to provincial health offices, infection hospitals and other hospitals, Sriwahyuni said.

    Although she admitted that this was not a lot for 220 million people, she said that “for the time being” it is “quite enough.”

    A Roche spokesperson confirmed that the company had received orders from Indonesia regarding Tamiflu and that the country is “in the process of building up” a stockpile, but could not comment further on the amount and details of the order.

    She said the price of the product has not been a problem as Roche offers one price for developed and another for developing countries.

    The Roche spokesperson also said that Tamiflu is not patented in Indonesia, noting that the patent in fact belongs to US company Gilead. The spokesperson said that according to the Roche patent policy, it does not take out patents on products in the “poorest countries” and there is also no patent for Tamiflu in the Philippines, for example. Gilead could not be reached for comment.

    No Patent, No Problem?

    The spokesperson also said that Roche had informed the Indonesian government that it is “free to produce” Tamiflu as there is no patent in that country.

    But this may be easier said than done, and so far no private company in Indonesia has done so. One WHO source in Indonesia said, “There are several companies that are interested in producing oseltamivir locally. However, they have not started production yet.”

    Roche argues that the absence of local production does not have anything to do with it not “handing out the recipe” for its drug.

    Patents and some manufacturing processes are published, the spokesperson said, adding, “Anyone interested in oseltamivir can do a literature search and study these patents and processes.”

    She said the key problem would be large-scale production. “If you start from scratch, it will take you some two to three years to be able to start producing oseltamivir,” the spokesperson said. This might be too long in the Indonesian situation.

    This shows that despite the lack of patents, countries such as Indonesia apparently still encounter problems when they try to stockpile Tamiflu.

    There have been no compulsory licenses issued for the production of Tamiflu, the spokesperson said. Such licenses would allow a company to manufacture the product regardless of the patent, which could increase Tamiflu’s global availability.

    Instead Roche has chosen – among some 200 companies that expressed interest – 15 production partners, which participate in one or several of the steps in the production process, the spokesperson said. They are part of the production chain, and produce the product under other names than Tamiflu, the spokesperson said.

    In addition, Roche has issued three sub-licenses, meaning that the companies are official partners, the spokesperson said. These are two companies in China (Shanghai Pharma Group and HEC Group) and one in India (Hetero). Roche also has a “technology transfer” deal with the pharmaceutical company, Aspen, in South Africa, the spokesperson said.

    Another option for a country such as Indonesia would be to order Tamiflu from countries that have produced the product under compulsory license issued by their respective governments under the World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). But so far no government has used this option for export, according to the WTO.

    One IP policy source in Geneva said that the non-production of Tamiflu in Indonesia, “could very well be lack of domestic manufacturing capacity for this specific product, as I think Indonesia is behind other Asian countries such as the Philippines and Thailand in terms of that ability.”

    Other Government Initiatives

    But although the Indonesian government has not produced medicines, it has taken other steps to protect its people against a possible avian influenza pandemic.

    It recently asked the WHO and the UN Food and Agriculture Organization to hold a conference on avian flu to bring in experts and provide recommendations for guidelines on avian flu both in humans and animals, the WHO said. The conference was held 21-23 June in Jakarta.

    The government has also established the Indonesian National Committee for Avian Influenza Control and Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (Komnas FBPI) under the Coordinating Minister for People’s Welfare, the WHO in Indonesia said. This committee is above the other ministries, reflecting its importance.

    “This coordinating minister is managing, among others, the minister of health, the minister of education, the state minister for women’s empowerment, the state minister for environment and other social-related ministers,” a WHO spokesperson said.

    Indonesia has also received aid from the WHO. Tamiflu was given to Indonesia in the affected areas after the recent outbreaks in humans. The medicine was provided as prophylactic treatment, meaning that people who have been in contact with a contaminated person get the product to stop the virus from developing, the spokesperson said, adding that some equipment for the protection of healthcare personnel was also provided.

    But these medicines were not taken from a Roche-donated WHO stock that is being held in Switzerland and the United States, which is reserved for “wrapping containment” and preventing the development of a pandemic when this can be done in a well-defined geographic area, the WHO spokesperson said.

     

    Comments

    1. Sophie Hebden says:

      For clarity’s sake, I just want to point out that the total number of WHO-confirmed cases of bird flu in humans in Indonesia is 52. (see http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/country/cases_table_2006_07_04/en/index.html). I’m concerned the casual reader might think it is 8 from your article.
      Thanks.


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.