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.

Analysis: Monkey In The Middle Of Selfie Copyright Dispute

The recent case of a monkey selfie that went viral on the web raised thorny issues of ownership between a (human) photographer and Wikimedia. Two attorneys from Morrison & Foerster sort out the relevant copyright law.


Latest Comments
  • CALLING FOR UPOV -2014 TO ADDRESS AFRICAN FARMERS... »
  • One can expect significant opposition to the proop... »

  • 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 >

    Special Report: With Poor And Uninsured A Majority, Southeast Asia Sees Rise In Generics

    Published on 27 November 2012 @ 3:53 pm

    By for Intellectual Property Watch

    Four of the world’s most populous nations are in Southeast Asia and with roughly two-thirds of its population lacking access to medicines, the region holds promise for the cheaper generic drugs. Already, observers are taking note of how the region is changing the dynamics of the global business.

    The structure of the generic drugs industry in Southeast Asia, like other parts of Asia, is “very different” from the rest of the world, Rhenu Bhuller, Asia Pacific vice-president for healthcare practice at research and consulting firm Frost & Sullivan, told Intellectual Property Watch in an interview.

    “You do not see companies like Teva, Sandoz or Mylan, who are world leaders in generics, being the leaders in the local Asian markets,” Bhuller said.

    Instead, he noted that home-grown companies such as the Philippines’ United Laboratories (Unilab) and Indonesia’s Kalbe Farma are the ones cornering the lion’s share of the domestic markets in the region.

    The generics market in China is 90 percent controlled by local producers as a result of their strong connection with the local governments, in which a commission-based model is being followed, and they have a competitive edge over their foreign counterparts in the areas of marketing and distribution, said Bhuller.

    And while this is also true in India, which is by far Asia’s single-country leader in generics production with its market now worth $26 billion and still growing, manufacturers there are also exporters.

    In Southeast Asia, local generics manufacturers are strongly focused on their respective domestic markets. “The generic manufacturers are mainly producing for local consumption, although there are manufacturers in Malaysia for example that are exporting to other developing countries like Africa,” Bhuller said.

    Two years ago, Frost & Sullivan published a study that looked into the status of the generic drugs industry in the region, covering Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. The study found that the industry was “slowly gaining more attention from patients and governments” in the region, with sales seen to hit $10.82 billion by 2016 from $6.8 billion in 2009.

    In the study, the research and consulting firm noted, among its other findings, that the generics market in the Philippines was “small”; that the Thai market was “not intense”; that the Malaysian market was the largest, accounting for 47.8 percent of the pharmaceuticals market; and that Singapore enjoyed an “efficient regulatory set-up and a stable macroeconomic environment,” resulting in “higher level of interest in generic drugs.”

    Since then, and over a span of just less than two years, some things have changed. Frost & Sullivan now sees the Philippines and Indonesia as “strong-growth local markets,” and with Singapore no longer playing a large role in generics compared to its neighbours as it has shifted its efforts and research and development (R&D) on “new innovative therapies.”

    “Indonesia, for example, has regulations in place that require foreign manufacturers to manufacture locally and there is a lot of interest to enter that market due to the population size and its economic growth,” Bhuller said. “We believe there will be more partnerships between Indonesian and foreign generic companies that will expand the products available in Indonesia.”

    In most of Asia, branded generics – equivalent drugs sold by non-innovator or non-originator pharmaceutical companies and marketed under proprietary names – rule over the unbranded ones. Generics in general are either off-patent drugs or those using a slightly different formulation to avoid infringing existing patents.

    Recent Developments

    In September, the Indonesian government, in a move not welcomed by multinational innovators, issued Presidential Regulation No. 76/2012, a decree allowing domestic drugs manufacturers to produce generic versions of some HIV/AIDS and Hepatities B (HBV) medications that are still under patent.

    According to the Jakarta Post, the decree covers highly active antiretroviral drugs such as efavirenz, abacavir, didanosine, a combination of lopinavir and ritonavir, and tenofovir.

    This is said to be the third time, following similar decrees issued in 2004 and 2007, that Indonesia issued a set of compulsory licences, a mechanism allowed under the World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

    Martin Khor of the intergovernmental South Centre said the use of compulsory licences to enable wider access to cheaper medicines to treat life-threatening diseases is picking up in the region.

    “Starting with Malaysia in 2003, many Asian countries are now taking action to promote cheaper medicines through compulsory licensing, with Indonesia being the latest case,” Khor said in his column for Malaysian newspaper The Star.

    Bhuller said most of the governments in the region are now under pressure to improve access to medicines, considering and subsequently implementing key policy reforms such as that of Indonesia to ease the plight of the “unreachable population.”

    “Generally, it will be life-threatening diseases that the populations have no possible way of getting access to at the costs they are being sold at in the market or that the governments are unable to expand their budgets to pay for at current prices,” he said.

    Competition, Collaboration

    As competition heats up between domestic generics manufacturers and innovators, the latter have developed various strategies, other than filing patent infringement cases at courts, in order to guard their businesses. These include developing their own generics units or making strategic acquisitions.

    “Generic companies have upped their game and are starting to differentiate themselves through quality and regulatory approvals/FDA standards,” Bhuller said.

    In the Philippines, Unilab, which owns the generic brand RiteMed, can attest to the growing business and intensifying competition.

    “It’s tough, but the locals are winning. We witness the rise of Unilab’s RiteMed and the pull out of Pfizer’s Parke Davis. Sanofi’s Winthrop and Novartis’ Sandoz are doing well. However, while competing, there is also collaboration,” Unilab senior vice-president for business development Jose Maria Ochave told Intellectual Property Watch in an interview.

    One example of collaboration is that Sandoz is the one manufacturing some of RiteMed’s products, a fact confirmed by the Novartis generics unit.

    “We are a supplier to RiteMed. Asia is an important market for Sandoz and in the first nine months of the year sales were up 21 percent, [but] we wouldn’t comment on competitors in the region or specific trends,” Neil Moorhouse, Sandoz global spokesperson, told Intellectual Property Watch.

    Ochave said that in the Philippines, more than 60 percent of the medicines are generics and Unilab is capitalising on this growth by building a unibrand through RiteMed, instead of multiple product brands, to further reduce costs and to be able to offer lower-priced medicines.

    Similar to other aggressive generics manufacturers, Unilab has been caught in legal battles with innovators. One is with Pfizer over the anti-cholesterol drug Atorvastatin Calcium. Unilab just won at the Court of Appeals, in which the court junked a petition to reverse a lower court decision denying injunction.

    And with the region poised for bigger growth in generics, it is expected that more legal tussles, such as this, lie ahead.

    Maricel Estavillo may be reached at maricelestavillo@gmail.com.

     


    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 54.83.233.43