- EB136: WHO outlines contours of a Pooled Fund for Global Health Research and Development
- EB136: WHO Evaluation of the global strategy and plan of action on public health, innovation and intellectual property
- SCCR29: Summary By the Chair
- SCCR 29 Chair Proposed Summary for Broadcasting treaty
- SCCR 29 KEI Statement on Limitations and Exceptions regarding Education
- SCCR 29: Limitations and exceptions for educational and research institutions and for persons with other disabilities
- SCCR 29 Negotiations on Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives (US, Greece, Kenya, Brazil)
- SCCR29: Opening statement of the Asia and the Pacific Group on limitations and exceptions for libraries and archives
- SCCR 29 December 11, 2014 Plenary on L&E for Libraries and Archives: a Few General Statements
- SEPTA class action suit on excessive pricing of Sovaldi, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Karl De Gucht writes Andris Piebalgs on topic of European Union IPR demands on India and other developing countriesSubmitted by James Love on 27. May 2011 - 16:15
KEI has received a copy of a May 16, 2011 letter from Karl De Gucht to Andris Piebalgs, which discusses (1) the EU-India FTA, and (2) Relations between IPR and development policies.
Senator Sanders introduces two medical innovation prize bills in U.S. Senate to de-link R&D costs from drug pricesSubmitted by James Love on 27. May 2011 - 4:53
There is a growing interest in the use of innovation inducement prizes to stimulate investments in medical research and development.
- The Obama Administration and the European Commission are exploring the role of innovation inducement prizes.
- On May 31, 2011, the European Parliament is holding one of several meetings on innovation inducement prizes for medical technologies.
At 18:30 Geneva time on 25 May 2011, during the 129th session of the WHO Executive Board, the EB is considering the following draft decision on WHO reform.
Chair's text, based on draft proposed by Ecuador
The 29th [sic] Executive Board,
(OP.1) DECIDES to establish an incremental, transparent, Member-State driven and inclusive consultative process comprising of the following elements:
Letter to the 129th WHO Executive Board on conflicts of interest, WHO reform and the future of financingSubmitted by thiru on 24. May 2011 - 4:00
24 May 2011
NGO letter on Conflicts of Interest, Future Financing, Reform and governance of the WHO.
Dear Members of the Executive Board,
World Intellectual Property Organization
DATE: MAY 20, 2011
Standing Committee on the Law of Patents
Geneva, May 16 to 20, 2011
SUMMARY BY THE CHAIR
Agenda Item 1: Opening of the session
1. The sixteenth of the Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) was opened by Mr. James Pooley, Deputy Director General, who welcomed the participants. Mr. Philippe Baechtold (WIPO) acted as Secretary.
BRICS Health Ministers’ preparatory meeting – May 17th 2011
Consistent with the mandate of the Sanya Declaration of the BRICS Leaders Meeting (14 April 2011), the Ministers of Health of the five BRICS’ countries met on the sidelines of the 64thWorld Health Assembly, on 17 May 2011, to discuss issues of common interest as well as prepare the BRICS Health Ministerial Meeting to be held in Beijing, China, on 11 July 2011. Representatives of WHO and UNAIDS also attended the meeting.
16th session of the WIPO Standing Committee of the Law of Patents (SCP)
Thursady, 19 May 2011
KEI Statement on Patents and Health
KEI is impressed by and fully supportive of the joint proposal of the African Group and the Development Agenda Group on a work program on Patents and Health, which has been published as SCP/16/7. We agree with the comments of the Chair that the proposal is both comprehensive and well thought out.
Civil Society on transparency, public health in TPPA; 28 Senators call for highest standards of protection IP in agreementSubmitted by Krista Cox on 18. May 2011 - 15:32
On Wednesday, May 18, 2011, eight civil society organizations submitted joint comments and recommendations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).
64TH WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY
The future of financing for WHO A64/4
WHO REFORM AGENDA
Provisional agenda item 11
STATEMENT BY THE BRAZILIAN DELEGATION
At the outset we would like to thank the report by the Director-General on WHO reform and its future financing for a healthy future. We acknowledge the efforts to reflect comments and suggestions presented by Member-States throughout the ongoing consultation process and believe the document is a good basis for our continued debate on this important issue.
This is the statement that was delivered by Karin L. Ferriter (from USPTO and USTR), at a UNITAID side event on the Medicines Patent Pool, during a break of the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Patents.
Statement on Medicines Patent Pool Side Event
WIPO SCP16: Joint proposal of the African Group and the Development Agenda Group on a work program on Patents and HealthSubmitted by thiru on 18. May 2011 - 4:20
Update: The proposal has now been formally published on the WIPO web site as SCP/16/7.
NGO Statement on WHO governance and the Management of Conflicts of Interest and the Future of Financing for WHOSubmitted by James Love on 18. May 2011 - 2:07
NGO Statement on WHO governance and the Management of Conflicts of Interest and the Future of Financing for WHO.
May 18, 2011
We write to express our concerns about governance of the World Health Organization (WHO) and other public health bodies, as regards the management of conflicts of interest.
SCP16: Slide presentations of Professor Carlos Correa, Judit Rius Sanjuan and James Love at KEI briefing on Patents and HealthSubmitted by thiru on 17. May 2011 - 9:27
On 17 May 2011, Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) organized a Briefing on Patents and Health at WIPO’s 16h session of the Standing Committee on Patents (SCP).
During today's discussion at the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) on patent quality KEI make four points in its intervention.
1. WIPO should consider gathering information on the costs of litigation to challenge the validity of patents.
2. WIPO should consider creating a database to share information on the cases where litigation has resulted findings that patent claims as invalid.