Oligopolist Speech and the Public Interest in Pharmaceutical Patent Law Reform

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (01) ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Chris Dent ◽  
Yvonne Haigh
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Patent System ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Pharmaceutical Patents ◽  
The Public ◽  
Pharmaceutical Patent ◽  
Reform Processes

AbstractUnderstandings of the public interest underpin many law reform processes. The public interest is not a fully definable term and so reform bodies have to engage with a range of articulations of that interest. The negotiation of the different articulations, however, has not been explored empirically before. This article reports on a study of the claims to the public interest in a public Australian inquiry into potential abuses of the patent system by pharmaceutical companies. More specifically, submissions to the Pharmaceutical Patents Review are analysed and the results show “oligopolistic” tensions between competing views of the public interest—and with these views claiming primacy over more technical understandings of the issues. This lack of a single “public interest” allows dominant players to frame the debate to reflect their interests; and the tension between these players means that the debate, and the underlying problem, has not been subject to a resolution.

Cohabitants, Choice, and the Public Interest

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Leckey
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Intimate Relationships ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Regulatory System ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Private Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
System P ◽  
The Face

Through the narrow entry of property disputes between former cohabitants, this chapter aims to clarify thinking on issues crucial to philosophical examination of family law. It refracts big questions—such as what cohabitants should owe one another and the balance between choice and protection—through a legal lens of attention to institutional matters such as the roles of judges and legislatures. Canadian cases on unjust enrichment and English cases quantifying beneficial interests in a jointly owned home are examples. The chapter highlights limits on judicial law reform in the face of social change, both in substance and in the capacity to acknowledge the state's interest in intimate relationships. The chapter relativizes the focus on choice prominent in academic and policy discussions of cohabitation and highlights the character of family law, entwined with the general private law of property and obligations, as a regulatory system.

International Protection of Intellectual Property Rights: Special Refrence with Intangible Properties and Copyright Laws.

LAW REVIEW ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohit P Singh ◽  
Shiv Kumar Tripathi
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
International Protection ◽  
The Public ◽  
Copyright Laws ◽  
Rapid Pace

In view of the rapid pace of technological, scientific and medical innovations in India and abroad, the intellectual property rights i.e., copyright, patent and other neighboring rights, have been recognized in Indian and foreign jurisdiction. Moreover, its scope and content have expanded pursuant to statutory amendments over the years. Growing recognisiont, expansion and protection of IPRs needs to harmonised with the public interest. Within this backdrop, copyright law, patent law etc. have made elaborate provisions and endeavours have also been made at international level to strike a balance between protection of individual’s IPRS and social interest. The present article tries to examine the contours of protection of IPRS at national and international levels with special reference to copyright law.

scholarly journals Healthcare innovation and patent law’s ‘pharmaceutical privilege’: is there a pharmaceutical privilege? And if so, should we remove it?

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham Dutfield
Keyword(s):  
Precision Medicine ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Patent System ◽  
Targeted Treatment ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Benefits ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Drug Patent ◽  
Healthcare Innovation

AbstractThis article reviews current trends in patent claims regarding personalised, stratified and precision medicine. These trends are not particularly well understood by policymakers, even less by the public, and are quite recent. Consequently, their implications for the public interest have hardly been thought out. Some see personalised and other secondary drug patent claims as promoting better targeted treatment. Others are inclined to see them as \manifestations of ‘evergreening’ whereby companies are, in some cases quite cynically, trying to extend market monopolies in old products or creating new monopolies based on supposedly improved versions of such earlier drugs. The article claims that the relaxation of ‘novelty’ is a privilege unavailable to inventions in other fields and that on balance the patent systemdoesprivilege this industry and that no adequate case has yet been made thus far to prove the public benefits overall.

scholarly journals New Changes, New Possibilities: China’s Latest Patent Law Amendments

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Yu ◽  
Kenneth Yip
Keyword(s):  
Public Services ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Patent System ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies

Abstract New amendments to China’s Patent Law feature open licensing which should encourage the use of patents, and promote the more rapid broadcast and dissemination of new technology. They should also offer the possibility of greater transactional visibility, transparency and traceability which has important ramifications for IP valuation and reporting in IPOs, annual and other reports. Other provisions underscore China’s efforts to improve its patent system by introducing new protections for patent holders, mechanisms to reduce abuse, provisions to strengthen patent-related public services and promote the use of patents. There are also a number of changes that should interest pharmaceutical companies, patent litigants, patent holders and app developers.

Why SEPs have been involved in Antitrust Cases – From A Chinese Scholar’s Perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoye Wang
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Antitrust Law ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
Technical Standard ◽  
The Public ◽  
Injunctive Relief ◽  
Standard Essential Patents ◽  
Antimonopoly Law

AbstractIf patents have been included in a technical standard and thus have become standard essential patents (SEPs), the SEP holders normally have to commit to the Standard Setting Organization (SSO) to license their SEPs on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. Although the FRAND commitments already put constraints on the patentees, more and more disputes over FRAND licensing fees involving SEPs are reaching antitrust enforcement agencies and courts, perhaps due to the fact that the FRAND commitments are often not workable. As demonstrated in the case Huawei v. IDC in Chinese courts, SEPs have special characteristics compared to non-SEPs, i.e. the licensing of SEPs relates more to the public interest, the holders of the SEPs may be thought to have dominant positions in the licensing market of their SEPs, the holder of the SEPs often have made commitments to license on the FRAND terms, and the holder of the SEPs should be allowed to use the injunctive relief only in limited circumstances. This article also proposes that Article 55 of the Chinese Antimonopoly Law (AML) should be reconsidered because it exempts the undertakings who exercise their IPRs in accordance with the laws and administrative regulations on IPRs from the application of the AML. However, as this article shows, the excessive royalty requested or the injunction sought by the holder of SEPs may not violate the patent law, but nonetheless may violate the antitrust law.

Legalising Cannabis for Therapeutic Use: A Comparative Assessment

1998 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 273-285
Author(s):  
Miriam Aziz ◽  
Murray Earle
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Palliative Treatment ◽  
Medical Practitioner ◽  
Therapeutic Use ◽  
Comparative Assessment ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Minimum Standard ◽  
The Public ◽  
Traditional Function ◽  
The Law

Therapeutic use of cannabis as a palliative treatment for certain medical conditions has been hotly debated in Britain in recent months. The weight of public opinion is behind a reform of the law; reform would legalise the possession and use of cannabis for therapeutic ends. This paper will endorse that argument by concentrating on a central contradiction within the law: while the law meticulously categorises the drugs which it regulates and prohibits, it is unwilling divide users of particular drugs into recreational and therapeutic groupings. This paper argues that the traditional arguments against making such a change in the law are unable to hold water, particularly when viewed in comparison with developments in Germany. We will also propose that the medical practitioner fulfil an existing traditional function as gate keeper in order to ensure supply and quality are both kept to a certain minimum standard. This policy will serve the ends of patients for whom this treatment is effective and cheap and which is justified in the public interest.

Is 'evergreening' a cause for concern? A legal perspective

1969 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Parker ◽  
Kevin Mooney
Keyword(s):  
Patent Protection ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Pharmaceutical Products ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Patent System ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Generic Competition ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Weak Patents

A number of fundamental principles (and misconceptions) of patent law and of the system for granting and enforcing patents lie at the heart of the so-called 'evergreening' debate on patent protection for pharmaceutical products. The purpose of this paper is to consider 'evergreening' from a legal perspective and to evaluate the extent to which the patent system operates to safeguard against the claimed abuses. In the authors' view the allegation that pharmaceutical companies have been able to delay substantially the entry of generic competition by 'evergreening' many of their patents simply does not reflect the reality and mischaracterises how the patent system operates in the context of technological innovation. A patent over an improvement does not restrict a generic company from launching a competitor of the originator product and, in the UK at least, the procedure and attitude of the court is conducive to the speedy and cost-effective challenge of 'weak' patents.

scholarly journals The COVID-19 Pandemic: Stress Test for Intellectual Property and Pharmaceutical Laws

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Oser
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Stress Test ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Market Exclusivity ◽  
Compulsory Licensing ◽  
The Public ◽  
Emergency Situations ◽  
Legal Provisions

Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic poses a challenge to certain standards in patent law as well as in pharmaceutical law. This paper discusses questions as to whether and under what conditions government-ordered or privately claimed compulsory licensing can contribute to controlling the pandemic. The existing obstacles and conflicts under the current legal framework, such as a lack of international harmonization and a lack of coherence between patent law (compulsory licensing) and pharmaceutical law (data protection), are outlined and discussed. A possible solution could lie in a modernization of relevant legal provisions to create an internationally harmonized balance between the public interest in using important patents in the present and in future emergency situations and the interest of patent owners and data and market exclusivity holders in allowing exemptions within clearly defined limits. The article concludes with a discussion of conditions that may influence possible solutions.

Building national initiatives of compulsory licences

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thaddeus Manu
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
World Trade Organisation ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Compulsory Licensing ◽  
The Public ◽  
National Initiatives ◽  
Bayer Corporation

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which developing countries could build national initiatives of compulsory licences. Design/methodology/approach – The focus of this article is only on developing countries. The author reflects on the Indian patent jurisprudence regarding the operational relationship between the general principles applicable to working of patented inventions locally and the grant of compulsory licences. The discussion that follows is based on a review of the case: Bayer Corporation versus Natco Pharma with a view to presenting a model for developing countries to maintain that the public interest principle of patent law is well-founded in their domestic patent regimes. Findings – The analysis confirms that failure to work locally continues to be abusive of the patent right under the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement, and remains a valid condition on which to grant a compulsory licence. Thus, this reverses the often-contrary misconception that has become almost a unanimous assumption that failure to work basis for granting compulsory licensing would violate Article 27(1) of TRIPS and its enforcement provisions on patent. Originality/value – The author argues that as no member state has challenged the legality of Indian’s decision in the World Trade Organisation, under the dispute settlement understanding (DSU) system is more supportive of the contention that failure to work locally continues to be permissible under TRIPS and remains valid conditions on which member states can grant compulsory licences. This further adds weight to the understanding that nothing in the light of TRIPS would, in fact, preclude any possibility of developing countries amending their patent laws accordingly to maintain that the public interest principle underlining patent law is well-founded in their domestic patent regimes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document