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 >

    “Trilateral” Symposium Addresses Topics Of Global Public Health And IP

    Published on 10 July 2013 @ 11:30 am

    By for Intellectual Property Watch

    The themes of innovation, collaboration, and policy coherence shared the spotlight during panel discussions at the 5 July technical symposium entitled, Medical Innovation: Changing Business Models. The event was jointly hosted by the World Health Organization, World Intellectual Property Organization, and World Trade Organization, and included private sector representatives.

    The landscape of health, in general, is changing. Shifting trends in economic development, disease prevalence, and intellectual property protection have all contributed to an increase in cross-sector dialogue. This is the result of an attempt to address the challenge of equitable, efficient, and sustainable medical innovation.

    Antimicrobial resistance is an area in which there is huge immediate concern because, as many speakers pointed out, treatments that exist today will be ineffective in the future. The potential of entering a ‘pre-antibiotic era’ has amplified the need for more innovation not only in R&D but also in treatment and quality of care.

    Innovation, in its broadest sense, concerns more than purely medical innovation. Richard Laing, medical officer in the WHO Department of Essential Medicines and Health Products, spoke about innovation in health systems as a whole. Laing stressed the need to look for opportunities for innovation in pricing policies, partnerships, and regulatory schemes in order to improve the current status of medical research and development (R&D).

    Developing medicines for noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), such as treatments for cancer, will require innovation around pricing structures and policies. Given the epidemiological shift in the burden of disease across the globe, but especially in middle-income countries, the price of medicines will be increasingly disputed, as more people require more expensive, longer-term therapies. Whether drug prices should prioritise the value of medicines or rather cost containment of health care expenditure remains unclear to both governments and industry.

    Andrew Jenner, director of innovation and trade policy at the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA), suggested that the real question regarding medicine pricing is determining medicines’ true value. He admitted that industry has found this difficult to describe and said that, “value-based pricing looks and feels a lot like cost-containment.”

    Jenner said that the difficulty in developed countries is with the limited budget for healthcare that essentially serves as a price cap, and that value-based pricing is therefore “not really the modus operandi if you have a cap.” Jenner recommended that developed countries “work together to find a methodology that can describe the value of a medicine.” He added that a different approach is needed for developing countries because “their ability to pay is different.” Jenner underscored the need think creatively about price structures, and for “an equitable balance between rights and obligations of governments to look after their citizens, and what industry need to do.”

    Further industry insight was provided by Petra Laux, head of global public and governmental affairs at Novartis. She said intellectual property is “a way to deal with knowledge and make it available to others.” Laux posed a question, in the context of markets driving innovation, of the extent to which emerging markets will contribute to the payback for R&D.

    Richard Wilder, associate general counsel at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, focussed on the importance of data and measurement in informing policy and decision-making. He said that the better quality and availability of data now provides an opportunity to “say something much more specific about burden of disease, what the gaps are, what kind of funding is available.” Wilder added that cooperation among three agencies (WHO, WIPO, and WTO) can largely be facilitated through a “rigorous view of data” in the identification of common goals and how to achieve them.

    Collaboration across sectors between partners and stakeholders was regularly mentioned in the presentations made throughout the day. Jenner described a greater desire among companies to share risks, resources, but also to share the rewards. “The new model we are seeing is moving away from profit alone models to profit together models,” he said.

    Jenner also provided examples of cross-sector collaboration, such as that of the US government providing funding to Glaxo-Smith Kline to develop treatments for antimicrobial resistance. He summarised his message by quoting an African proverb: “if we go at it alone we go fast, but if we go together we go far.”

    The trilateral event was opened by the heads of the three international agencies (IPW, Public Health, 8 July 2013).

    Brittany Ngo is currently completing her Master’s in Health Policy and Global Health at the Yale School of Public Health and previously obtained a Bachelor’s of Arts in Economics from Georgetown University. Through her studies she has developed an interest in health-related intellectual property issues. She is a summer intern at Intellectual Property Watch.

    Brittany Ngo 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 54.167.242.224