Indian NGOs confront GWU Law School efforts to push maximalist IPR norms in India

The ties between Universities and businesses are often complex and blurred. Private companies or trade associations fund research and seminars, and have consulting relationships with faculty members, trying to shape public policy and judicial decisions on a wide range of issues. A particularly interesting industry/university connection concerns something called the “India Project,” that is associated with the George Washington University (GWU) Law School.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

KEI looks at USTR letter to Wyden, and conflicts between ACTA and patent reform

On January 6, 2010, Senator Ron Wyden sent a letter to the USTR asking a number of questions about the U.S. negotiating objectives in ACTA. On February 28, 2010, USTR responded. The USTR response focused mostly on the official U.S. “asks,” rather than the state of the negotiating text, which also reflects also the views of other parties. For this reason, the USTR letter to Wyden only tells part of the story about what ACTA may do.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized
1

PhRMA pushes for data exclusivity in 2010 Special 301 comments

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) 2010 Special 301 submission (a 200 plus page document) systematically lists in great detail, grievances against 41 countries for, in its view, the insufficient implementation and enforcement of national IP legislation.

A primary focus of attention and frequent “area of concern” in the submission is the inadequate protection of pharmaceutical regulatory data. Regulatory data refers to test and clinical trial data generated by drug developers and submitted as requisite evidence of safety and efficacy for the successful registration of a product. While data protection can take many forms, data exclusivity regimes grant a period of exclusive rights to the originator during which generic manufacturers are banned from relying on the original data to meet registration standards of safety and efficacy. In its submission, PhRMA relentlessly advocates for, indeed makes demands of several countries to implement data exclusivity provisions that go far beyond their obligations under the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

As noted by KEI and others in submissions to USTR, a number of public health and development NGOs have been highly critical of data exclusivity regimes, citing the large barriers to the introduction of generic medicines, and the conflicts between data exclusivity and medical ethics, when generic firms are required to replicate experiments with humans where the results of trials are already known. KEI will focus on the issue of pharmaceutical test data protection in its testimony on the Special 301 list on March 3, 2010.

Below are country-specific statements on this subject from PhRMA’s submission:


PhRMA has singled out THAILAND by recommending that it be identified as a Priority Foreign Country

In 2007, implementing Ministerial regulations of the Trade Secrets Act of 2002 were issued by the Thai FDA. While the regulations provide trade secret protection that prohibits disclosure of confidential information, the regulations fail to prohibit the Thai FDA or generic drug applicants, for a fixed period of time, from relying on the originator’s regulatory data to approve generic versions of the originator’s product. That protection (referred to as Data Protection) should be established by Thailand to ensure unfair commercial use of innovators’ data does not occur.

PhRMA encourages Thailand to (1) implement new regulations that do not permit generics producers to rely directly or indirectly on the originators’ data, unless consent has been provided by the originator, for the approval of generic pharmaceutical products during the designated period of exclusivity; (2) bring Thailand’s regulations in line with international best practices by making clear that trade secret protection is provided to all confidential material whenever it is received by officials; (3) extend data protection to new dosage forms, new indications, etc; and (4) require Thai FDA officials to protect information provided in confidence by the originator by ensuring that information is not improperly made public or made available for use or reliance by a subsequent producer of a generic pharmaceutical product.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

KEI notes on the EU leak of the ACTA text

On 12 February 2010, the Council of the European Union distributed a table drawn up by the Commission Services, outlining the positions of various counties regarding civil enforcement and the special requirements relating to the Internet. A copy of this 44 page document was leaked on March 1, 2010, and is attached to this blog. A text version of the table is available from swpat.org.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

KEI comments on U.S.T.R. 2010 Special 301

KEI is one of several public health groups working with Sean Flynn on filing comments in the current U.S.T.R. request for comments on the Special 301 process (Federal Register Notice USTR-2010-0003-0129). In addition, KEI filed these comments:

KEI comments on Special 301

18 February 2010

KEI provides the following comments regarding the 2010 Special 301 Review, including but not limited to the Identification of Countries Under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Our comments include the following points:

    Continue Reading

4

PhRMA’s grants to US organizations in 2008

In the United States, tax exempt non-profit organizations are subject some some requirements for financial disclosure via the IRS form 990, which is available to the public. The disclosure requirements cover most U.S. based trade associations, including the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the trade association for some 28 “member” companies.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

WIPO Symposium on the Evolution of the Regulatory Framework of Test Data

As mentioned, before WIPO is holding a symposium on February 8, 2010 on the “Evolution of the Regulatory Framework of Test Data – From the Property of the Intellect to the Intellect of Property”. The symposium will be held from 9:30 AM to 5 PM in Room B of WIPO headquarters.

The program of the symposium can be found here: http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/mdocs/en/wipo_ip_lss1_ge_10/wipo_ip_lss1_ge_10_inf_1_prov.pdf

Continue Reading

Uncategorized
1

Deadlock at 14th session of the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP)

After a around 10 hours of informal consultations today, it appears that the 14th session of the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) has not reached consensus on new items for the Committee’s consideration. From sources close to the negotiation, much of the wrangling dealt with whether to preserve the non-exhaustive nature of the list of issues identified at SCP 12 and SCP 13. Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Brazil’s proposal at WIPO on patent limitations and exceptions (SCP/14/7)

On January 15, 2010 the Permanent Mission of Brazil to the World Trade Organization and other economic organizations in Geneva submitted a proposal to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The Brazilian note verbale to WIPO notes that the proposal:

“aims at contributing to the discussion of exceptions and limitations to patent rights. . . While not purporting to cover all interfaces of the matter with development concerns, it emphasizes the importance of promoting a wide and sustained debate on the issue in the SCP”.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized