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.

Advertisement


Inside Views

Submit ideas 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.

WHO Should Have The Evidence? Ben Goldacre Refutes WHO Director’s Claim

“Bad Science” adversary and journalist, Dr Ben Goldacre, this week challenged WHO Director of Ethics and Social Determinants of Health, Dr Rüdiger Krech, on his understanding of published evidence.





Latest Comments
  • As it happens, I own and create "intellectual prop... »
  • So long term planning of the UN Development Decade... »

  • For IPW Subscribers
    A directory of IP delegates in Geneva. Read more>

    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 >


    Broad Plan On IP, Innovation In Developing Countries Approved At WHO

    Published on 22 May 2009 @ 12:51 pm

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    Applause broke out at the annual World Health Assembly Friday as agreement was reached at the end of a five-year process to devise a plan for boosting research and development on and access to drugs needed by developing countries. Now with the full assembly’s approval, the focus turns to five-year implementation and as-yet unclear ways to pay for it.

    “You have found some elegant ways forward after many years, and many intense hours of negotiation, consensus building, and compromise,” World Health Organization Director General Margaret Chan told the closing plenary.

    “This is a critical resolution, and we have come a long way to the place we are today,” committee Chair Stephen McKernan of New Zealand said at the committee meeting conclusion. The agreement reached at committee level was approved by the full assembly later on Friday, according to sources.

    Agreement in committee was reached after a group of developing countries eager to discuss a possible treaty on biomedical R&D dropped a demand to include the WHO as a stakeholder in discussions about the treaty (IPW, WHO, 21 May 2009).

    The approved global strategy and plan of action [pdf] on public health, innovation and intellectual property aims by 2015 to train over 500,000 R&D workers, improve research infrastructure, national capacity and technology transfer, and lead to numerous other outcomes such as creating 10 public access compound libraries and 35 new health products (vaccines, diagnostics and medicines).

    The WHO legal counsel gave an opinion to the committee that dropping the WHO as a stakeholder would not prejudice the R&D treaty issue as it is addressed in a separate expert working group on financing to continue deliberations this year under a mandate from the 2008 assembly. Those proposals are still on the table and could go the assembly next year, the counsel said. It also would not prevent any member state from making any proposals to the Executive Board as is standard WHO process. But that process does not guarantee any proposal will be accepted, the counsel noted.

    The group of countries read a statement to the committee – which included WHO Director General Margaret Chan – expressing their disappointment and concern about the competence of the WHO. The group included Bangladesh, Barbados, Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Suriname and Venezuela. Argentina was part of the concerned group but dropped out overnight.

    “We believe an R&D treaty would transform the landscape of biomedical innovation to incorporate needs-driven health R&D and ensure sustainable financing mechanisms,” Bolivia said on behalf of the group. “The governments are of the firm conviction that closing the door on the WHO undermines the faith the assembled member states have in the competence of the organisation in fulfilling its public health mandate.”

    “The treaty would have significant implications for global pharmaceutical research and development and much time, effort and hope may be lost if WHO, which is in a position to support the needs of developing countries, is not allowed to participate in bringing it to fruition,” the Bolivian ambassador to the United Nations continued. “We express our disappointment that such a situation has come to pass given the diligent efforts of all….”

    The secretariat did not further address concerns about inclusiveness on Friday, but meeting Chair McKernan said it is “something we can all take into consideration” for the next time. He said thought should be given to how to better bring language developed in informal processes to the whole membership so as to avoid such concerns in the future.

    On a related issue, Brazil brought about a small change to the evaluation mechanism for the global strategy and action plan, adding that there would be “continued monitoring” of the implementation and an overall programme review in 2014, a year before the end of the process in 2015.

    To accomplish all of the proposed activities was estimated by the secretariat to cost nearly $150 billion over the period of implementation. But several participants de-emphasised those estimates as hard to verify.

    Non-governmental and industry groups appeared to breathe a collective sigh of relief after the outcome, though none were perfectly satisfied.

    “They can now … focus everyone on implementing” the global strategy and plan of action, said Jon Pender, government affairs director for the Global Access, IP and HIV/AIDS Issues at GlaxoSmithKline.

    The agreement “has the potential to address serious medical needs” in developing countries, Pender said afterward. It provides a complementary mechanism to the existing system, he said.

    “I think this is good news,” said Tido von Schoen-Angerer, executive director of the Médecins Sans Frontières access to essential medicines campaign. “The way it continues to be open for discussion for an R&D treaty, a number of countries expressed their interest.”

    “Now the important thing is for the expert working group to sincerely consider this, and the expectation is for the Executive Board” to address it at its next meeting in January, he told Intellectual Property Watch.

    On funding, he said a biomedical R&D treaty would contribute, and said there is a need for a look at “burden-sharing” as some countries like the United States are already making significant contributions.

    Meanwhile, NGOs Health Action International and IQsensato this week issued a proposed way for countries to monitor implementation of the strategy and action plan. The proposal is available here.

    Separately, a draft resolution on prevention and control of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis approved in committee included an added paragraph tying the process to the IP and innovation strategy and action plan. The added paragraph called for “ensuring affordability of these new products by de-linking cost of research and development from the prices of health products.” This echoes the effort to look for alternative funding mechanisms, and reflects the need for new mechanisms to achieve the scale-up that is called for, according to Schoen-Angerer.

    Furthermore, a draft resolution on traditional medicine also included references to the global strategy and plan of action on public health, innovation and intellectual property.

    William New may be reached at wnew@ip-watch.ch.

     

    Comments

    1. Colloidal silver health products | Colloidal Silver products says:

      [...] Intellectual Property Watch » Blog Archive » Broad Plan On IP … [...]


    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.

     

     
    Your IP address is 184.72.91.94