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 Summer Interns

IP-Watch interns talk about their Geneva experience in summer 2013. 2:42.

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.

The Politicization Of The US Patent System

The Washington Post story, How patent reform’s fraught politics have left USPTO still without a boss (July 30), is a vivid account of how patent reform has divided the US economy, preempting a possible replacement for David Kappos who stepped down 18 months ago. The division is even bigger than portrayed. Universities have lined up en masse to oppose reform, while main street businesses that merely use technology argue for reform. Reminiscent of the partisan divide that has paralyzed US politics, this struggle crosses party lines and extends well beyond the usual inter-industry debates. Framed in terms of combating patent trolls through technical legal fixes, there lurks a broader economic concern – to what extent ordinary retailers, bank, restaurants, local banks, motels, realtors, and travel agents should bear the burden of defending against patents as a cost of doing business.


Latest Comments
  • “We want everybody to agree on the science telling... »
  • So this is how we mankind will become extinct? No ... »

  • 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 >

    Pharma Outlook: Don’t Yield On IP, Work On Trust-Building, Call For Global Cooperation

    Published on 1 November 2012 @ 8:01 pm

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    The International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) held its 26th assembly this week and elected its new president. He presented the future orientation of the industry group, saying will work on trust-building and needs predictability in the regulatory process, policies that sustain and encourage innovation, and a strong intellectual property system, he said.

    The new president’s presentation of these priorities followed a closed-door meeting of the association on 30 October.

    The industry group also launched a study [pdf] presenting enabling factors for biopharmaceutical innovation in middle-income countries.

    The newly elected president of IFPMA is John Lechleiter, chairman, president and CEO of Eli Lilly.

    In his address on 31 October during a biennial conference hosted by IFPMA, Lechleiter said he would “help ensure all the companies and organisations represented here today can carry on the heroic work of healing and saving lives well into the future, with more and more patients getting access to the medicine they need.”

    Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading cause of premature death in the world, he said, and medical innovation must be sustained. Today, he said, the biopharmaceutical industry has “in some stage of clinical development” nearly 900 potential medicines for cancer, more than 200 potential medicines for cardiovascular conditions, nearly the same amount for diabetes, 80 for HIV/AIDS and about 300 for rare diseases.

    However, development costs per drug have skyrocketed, he said, and the industry is in the midst of a five-year period where some US$150 billion of branded pharmaceutical products will lose patent protection. Although this might be great news for consumers, it translates into that much less annual revenue to reinvest in research and development (R&D) for industry (under the current business model).

    Industry Adamant on IP, Needs Trust-Building

    “When it comes to healthcare policy, we need to speak up for policies that sustain and encourage innovation and against those which will undermine it,” said Lechleiter. Sound intellectual property protection and regulatory systems that keep pace with 21st century science are key to creating ecosystems for innovation, he added.

    The work of innovation is not possible and cannot be sustained without IPR protection, he said. “It is the lifeblood of any enterprise in our industry or any industry that seeks to create value from ideas.” On average, he said, it takes about 14 years and €1 billion euros (US$1.2 billion) to bring a new medicine from the drawing board to the pharmacy. Without the ability to protect IP, medical innovation will not be sustainable, he said.

    According to Lechleiter, the benefits of IP protection include not only breakthrough medicines but over time a broad range of low-price generic medicines, which he said he believes are an important legacy of the innovative research industry.

    Among priorities, Lechleiter said “it is more important than ever that we rebuild trust, and a good place to start” is the IFPMA code of practice developed in interaction with healthcare professionals, medical institutions and patient organisations around promotional activities, disclosure of clinical trial information, continuing medical education, and employee training. He called on members of IFPMA to commit to the “highest ethical standards,” to provide useful information about the benefits and the risks of the industry’s products, to remain vigilant about product safety and remain transparent in all business practices.

    Building trust and creating enabling environments for innovation will not be enough, however, he said, and called for an “unprecedented degree of global cooperation.” IFPMA members have many programmes and partnerships, and “spend billions of dollars to provide medicines to the underserved around the world,” he said, adding “we have a long way to go to be a trusted welcome solution partner to governments, non-governmental organisations, and others in developing and implementing systemic reforms which will allow much broader access to quality healthcare.”

    The biennial conference focused on the theme of innovation for global health, and gathered some 200 “public and private sector health leaders,” according to an IFPMA press release [pdf].

    New Study Describes Innovation Enabling Factors

    The new study commissioned by IFPMA on policies that encourage innovation in middle-income countries was conducted by Charles River Associates, a global consulting firm, and was launched on 31 October. The study examined biopharmaceutical innovation sectors in Brazil, China, Colombia, India, Malaysia, Russia, South Africa, and South Korea.

    Interviewed by Intellectual Property Watch, Tim Wilsdon, six conclusions were drawn out of the study. In order to encourage innovation, countries need to have a consistent long-term innovative policy that builds progressively overtime and is targeted toward the capacities of those countries.

    They also need to get their industrial and health policy “to act together,” he said, in particular for domestic and indigenous innovation, as it is important that they have a market into which to sell their innovations. Countries also need to focus on the types of innovation they are trying to develop. For example, what needs to be done to develop trial activities is different from what is needed for early stage research. Countries need to have a consistent aim and a set of policies to encourage the right kind of environment.

    It is not possible to do innovation just through public sector investment, and academia cannot develop medicines, Wilsdon said. Partnerships between public, private and academic institutions are necessary. Also intellectual property is clearly important, not only in the early stages of research, but for the localisation of clinical trials, he said.

    Finally, in terms of globalisation, the fragmentation of value chain, the growing markets in middle income countries and the stagnation in some of the pharmaceutical markets in some developed countries “have certainly been acting to help middle income countries to undertake innovative activities,” he added.

    China More Attractive than India

    Looking at the report, it appears that “you need a consistent innovation strategy to attract investments,” Andrew Jenner, director of intellectual property and trade at IFPMA, told Intellectual Property Watch, adding that China was at the moment a much more attractive environment than India. For example, he said the National Innovation Act of India was drafted in 2008 but not implemented.

    “From our perspective every country has a right to chose which IP regime they want and which way they want to go,” but when the industry starts to make investment decisions, that is such elements that it will look at. “If the risk and investment come primarily from our industry, we need to make sure that this investment can be recuperated at the end of the process.”

    “What we see more,” he said, is sharing of the risks and investment. “There is a move from profit alone, to profit together,” he said. China is an interesting example of a country providing an enabling environment for innovation, he said, noting that while there always will be challenges, “we know the kind of playing field we are entering.”

    India has made some improvements, according to Wilsdon, but “the weakness of the IP regime is one of the concerns about investing in early stage research.” “You need to have confidence in the rules, but mostly confidence in the enforcement of those rules in order to make investments decisions,” he said.

    India, one of the largest manufacturers of generic medicines, has been the target of critics from the research-based pharmaceutical industry about its IP regime, and in particular for a provision of its 2005 patent law, called Section 3(d), which creates a high standard for what is patentable. The country’s law has been challenged in court by several pharmaceutical industries (IPW, IP Law, 18 September 2012).

    Developing countries are markets of the future, Jenner said, and as such “it is easier to do R&D in the markets that are going to be of interest to us, which is not to say we will ever neglect developed countries, but we need to evolve and we need to adapt,” he said. A more flexible approach to innovation, the sharing of risks and investment will have a direct impact on access and on prices.

    “We share the risks and investment,” he said, “but at the end of the process we will share the rewards.”

    The IFPMA Assembly held a number of panels where health leaders discussed the role of innovation in improving global health. Among the speakers, World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Director General, Francis Gurry, said innovation required platforms rather than treaties and mentioned WIPO Re:Search, a consortium sponsored by WIPO and BIO Ventures for Global Health, aiming at facilitating research in neglected diseases, which celebrated its first anniversary this week.

    Catherine Saez may be reached at info@ip-watch.ch.

     


    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 54.237.90.56