THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LEGAL SYSTEM RELATED TO PUBLIC HEALTH IN CONNECTION WITH TRIPS FLEXIBILITIES IN INDONESIA

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-191
Author(s):  
Andrieansjah Andrieansjah
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Compulsory License ◽  
Parallel Imports ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Patent Rights ◽  
Research Problems ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Doha Declaration

In early 2020, countries in the world was shocked by a new virus called Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) including Indonesia. The COVID-19 pandemic gives impact to the legal system, including intellectual property (IP). Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) flexibilities on public health in developing countries: Transition Periods, Compulsory License, Government Use, Parallel Imports, Exceptions to Patent Rights, Exemptions from Patentability, Limits on Data Protection, and Implementation of the Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration. Research problems: (1) what are the conditions for implementing the flexibilities of TRIPS in facing COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia and (2) what are the issues that should be anticipated for future IP legal system relating to public health as a lesson from this COVID-19 Pandemic. Government Use is most effective to be used for encounter COVID-19 Pandemic, and voluntary license is recommended tobe promoted for future approach. The study is using a qualitative literature study.

Human rights restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland and Russia. Legal and comparative aspects

2021 ◽  
Vol 2(24) ◽  
pp. 323-340
Author(s):  
Marta Pietras-Eichberger
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Safety And Health ◽  
Research Problems ◽  
The Impact

The study analyzed selected issues related to the scope of human rights and freedoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland and Russia. The author wanted to compare the regulations issued by a Member State of the European Union and a country outside the European Union, often using undemocratic methods of exercising power. The work focuses on research problems related to the principles of protection, the confrontation of individual interests with the public interest, and the impact of the regimes introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic on human rights law in both countries. The thesis of the study is that in the event of a threat to public health, analogous restrictions on human rights are introduced both in an undemocratic country and in a country belonging to international structures identifying with democratic values. The state of the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed, and in some area even contributed to the creation of mechanisms reserved for crisis situations, posing a direct and real threat to public safety and health.

scholarly journals Impact of Sino-US Trade Agreement on Chinese Legal System about Intellectual Property Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 16
Author(s):  
Liu Ting
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Wide Field ◽  
The Government ◽  
Future Revision ◽  
The Impact

On January 15, 2020, the representatives of Sino-US trade signed Phase I Economic and Trade Agreement Between the Government of the People’s Republic of China and the Government of the United States of America in Washington, which symbolizes the temporary settlement of two-year Sino-US trade war in relatively peaceful method and lays a good foundation in mutual trust for subsequent Phase II negotiation. This Agreement includes eight chapters involving Sino-US economic and trade and is called the model of the international bilateral agreement by virtue of its wide field and rigorous details. The impact of clauses about intellectual property rights on China’s current legal system and the future revision direction of China’s relevant laws for conformance with the Agreement will be discussed emphatically so that the author can rapidly understand the impact and significance of Sino-US trade agreement to Chinese law.

scholarly journals THE IMPACT OF TRIPS AGREEMENT ON ACCESS TO MEDICINES IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: LEGAL CHALLENGES FACED BY THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY PARTICULARLY IN INDIA

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamini Shanmugaiah
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Access To Medicines ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Compulsory Licensing ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
The Impact

The impact of intellectual property rights in particular patent relating to public health has posed numerous challenges faced by developing countries who are members of World Trade Organisation (WTO). This paper examines the impact of TRIPS Agreement (Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights) in relation to developing countries in general with specification made to India. Significant changes brought about by the TRIPS flexibilities in particular usage of compulsory licensing and Bolar provision have to a certain extent benefited the developing countries in the field of public health during national emergency. The TRIPS flexibilities by way of amendment have helped countries that (do not possess manufacturing capacities) to import medicines. Some developing countries even utilised TRIPS flexibilities in an aggressive manner to enforce their right to have access to medicines from other countries for the benefit of their citizens. Further, TRIPs flexibilities have helped developing countries to manufacture generic products to make it affordable to the people. This paper specifically examines the impact of the TRIPS Agreement on Indian generic pharmaceutical industry and the legal challenges faced by Indian pharmaceutical industry after the implementation of product patent regime effective from 1 January 2005. The Patent Amendment Act 2005(India) will be looked into especially on the controversy in respect of Section 3(d) of the Patent Amendment Act 2005(India) on the requirement of patentability. The new Section 92A of the Patent Amendment Act 2005(India) on the grounds to invoke compulsory licensing will be analysed to see whether Indian government has applied restrictive or broad approach, as compulsory licensing is certainly an important legal

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTATION OF PATENT AND TRANSFER OF PATENT RIGHTS ACCORDING TO INDONESIAN PATENT LAW

2022 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abir Rafa Kamil
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Transfer Of Technology ◽  
Patent Rights ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Impact

AbstractIndonesia as a member of the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) is obliged to comply with the provisions stipulated in the Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (“TRIPs Agreement”) especially regarding Patents; therefore, the Government of Indonesia regulates the provisions regarding Patents by Law Number 13 of 2016 concerning Patent which has been amended through Law Number 11 of 2020 Concerning Job Creation (“Indonesia Patent Law”). Article 20 of Indonesian Patent Law regulates that “the implementation of Patents must be implemented in Indonesia which can be done by making, importing, and licensing.”. Related to the protection of patent rights granted, the state also hopes to transfer technology from Patent Holders; thus, their inventions can be produced and used without paying royalties to Patent Holders. However, the provisions regulated by the Government of Indonesia stipulate that the implementation of Patent can be carried out by importing, which will result in no transfer of technology from the Patent Holders to the state; thus, it will be detrimental to Indonesia. Therefore this paper will examine and explain the impact of applying Article 20 of the Indonesian Patent Law, especially regarding the implementation of Patent and transfer of Patent Rights.AbstrakIndonesia sebagai anggota World Trade Organization (“WTO”) wajib memenuhi ketentuan yang ditetapkan dalam Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rigths Agreement (“TRIPs Agreement”) terutama mengenai Paten, oleh karena itu, Pemerintah Indonesia mengatur ketentuan mengenai Patent melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 tentang Paten yang telah diubah melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 tentang Cipta Kerja (“UU Paten Indonesia”). Pasal 20 UU Paten Indonesia mengatur bahwa “implementasi Paten harus dilaksanakan di Indonesia yang dapat dilakukan dengan membuat, mengimpor, dan lisensi.”. Pada dasarnya terkait dengan perlindungan Hak Paten yang diberikan, negara juga berharap untuk terjadinya peralihan teknologi dari Pemegang Paten sehingga invensi mereka dapat diproduksi dan digunakan tanpa harus membayar royalty kepada Pemegang Paten. Namun, ketentuan yang diatur oleh Pemerintah Indonesia menetapkan bahwa implementasi Paten dapat dilakukan dengan importasi yang mana hal tersebut tidak akan menghasilkan peralihan teknologi dari Pemegang Paten kepada negara sehingga akan merugikan Indonesia. Oleh karena itu paper ini akan mengkaji dan menjelaskan dampak penerapan Pasal 20 UU Paten Indonesia khususnya mengenai implementasi Paten dan transfer Hak Patent.

scholarly journals Patents and public health

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-68
Author(s):  
J. M. Corberá Martínez
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Current System ◽  
Access To Medicines ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Patent Rights ◽  
Economic Nature

Tensions are now known between the interests of holders of patent rights over medicines and those of other groups, especially in developing countries. This work tries to deepen these interests from a point of view, mainly legal, which is accompanied by comments of an economic nature, while identifying possible legal and institutional ways to alleviate the negative social consequences of the current system. To this end, the conflicts generated by patents in the context of public health and, specifically, in relation to access to medicines, will be described, to then address the role of intellectual property systems and the concept and scope of public health. Finally, various legal channels will be presented to reconcile the affected interests and possible programmatic and institutional measures.

scholarly journals ANALISIS TARIF PREMI DAN ASUMSI LOADING PADA PRODUK ASURANSI DWIGUNA BEASISWA

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-64
Author(s):  
Ira Rosianal Hikmah ◽  
Yulial Hikmah
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Interest Rate ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Insurance Company ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Male Sex ◽  
The Impact

Based on data from Badan Pusat Statistik (BPS), the number of Indonesia's population has consistently increased every year. This will cause several problems, one of them is public health. Health problems that occur cause some risks that cause losses. Therefore, one way to reduce the impact of these risks is insurance. This study analyzes how the process of forming premium prices with loading assumptions that are in accordance with existing assumptions in order to meet the criteria of equitable to the client, deliverable by the agent, and profitable to the company. This research uses a quantitative research approach. The population in this study was all Sum Insured (SI) while the sample was 1000 SI male sex. The data used in this study are secondary data that is data from an ABC insurance company in Indonesia, literature study through books, journal references, and previous research. The results of this study are the calculation of premiums by the methods used by the company more efficiently when compared with formulas in accordance with the theory. Although the price of a premium is more expensive using the company method, it is not significantly different. If using the company method, the sum insured used is the sum insured from death benefit whereas the theory is the average of claims incurred at that age. The fees charged are still fairly reasonable in accordance with the rules of setting the price of insurance premiums. In addition, the use of CSO 80 tables and Reinsurance Rates that have been adjusted to the company's interest rate of 5% in accordance with the expected cash value desired by the company.

scholarly journals A Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Rimmer
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Electronic Commerce ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Neutral Position ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership ◽  
Access To Knowledge ◽  
The Impact

Executive Summary This submission provides a critical analysis of the proposed Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) – focusing in particular upon intellectual property and innovation policy.Recommendation 1 RCEP has a broad membership – even with the departure of India from the negotiations. Nonetheless, there remain outstanding tensions between participating nations – most notably, Australia and China. The re-emergence of United States into trade diplomacy will also complicate the geopolitics of the Asia-Pacific.Recommendation 2 The closed, secretive negotiations behind RCEP highlight the need for a reform of the treaty-making process in Australia, as well as the need for a greater supervisory role of the Australian Parliament.Recommendation 3 In terms of intellectual property principles and objectives, RCEP promotes foreign investment and trade, and intellectual property protection and enforcement. The agreement needs a stronger emphasis on public policy objectives – such as access to knowledge; the protection of public health; technology transfer; and sustainable development.Recommendation 4 RCEP establishes TRIPS-norms in respect of economic rights under copyright law.Recommendation 5 The agreement does not though enhance copyright flexibilities and defences – particularly in terms of boosting access to knowledge, education, innovation, and sustainable development.Recommendation 6 RCEP provides for a wide range of remedies for intellectual property enforcement – which include civil remedies, criminal offences and procedures, border measures, technological protection measures, and electronic rights management information. Such measures could be characterised as TRIPS+ obligations.Recommendation 7 The electronic commerce chapter of RCEP is outmoded and anachronistic. Its laissez-faire model for dealing with digital trade and electronic commerce is at odds with domestic pressures in Australia and elsewhere for stronger regulation of digital platforms.Recommendation 8 RCEP provides for protection in respect of trade mark law, unfair competition, designs protection, Internet Domain names, and country names.Recommendation 9 As well as providing safeguards against trade and investment action by tobacco companies and tobacco-friendly states, RCEP should do more to address the tobacco epidemic in the Asia-Pacific.Recommendation 10 RCEP has a limited array text on geographical indications, taking a rather neutral position in the larger geopolitical debate on the topic between the European Union and the United States.Recommendation 11 RCEP has provisions on plant breeders’ rights and agricultural intellectual property. There is a debate over the impact of such measures upon farmers’ rights in the Asia-Pacific.Recommendation 12 RCEP does not adequately respond to the issues in respect of patent law and access to essential medicines during the COVID-19 crisis. Likewise, RCEP is not well prepared for future epidemics, pandemics, and public health emergencies.Recommendation 13 RCEP provides limited protection of confidential information and trade secrets – even though there has been much litigation in this field in the Asia-Pacific.Recommendation 14 RCEP is defective because it fails to consider the inter-relationship between trade, labor rights, and human rights.Recommendation 15 RCEP fails to provide substantive protection of the environment, biodiversity, or climate in the Asia-Pacific.Recommendation 16 RCEP does little to reform intellectual property in line with the sustainable development goals.Recommendation 17 RCEP does not adequately consider Indigenous rights – including those in the Asia-Pacific.Recommendation 18 RCEP does not contain an investor-state dispute settlement mechanism. However, the Investment Chapter does have a number of items, which are problematic.

scholarly journals INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION AND DRUG PATENTS IN BRAZIL

Mercator ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (2020) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Fábio Tozi
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Intellectual Property Protection ◽  
Historical Change ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Ip Protection ◽  
The Us ◽  
Special 301 ◽  
Drug Patents

The article aims to reconstruct the central events of the Intellectual Property (IP) protection system in Brazil, from the first colonial orders to the Intellectual Property Law (1996). Two periods are identified: in the first, we observe the internalizing of innovations, improving the country's development, but preventing the patenting of medicines and food. The second, recent, explains an adaptation of national laws to international ones, suppressing the previous exceptions. The historical change in regulations reveals that patents have become symbolic elements of globalization process. The geopolitics of this process is presented in a review on the influence of the US Special 301 Reports on Brazilian politics. Finally, the article seeks to show that politics is not limited to the legal system, presenting the annulment of patents in Brazil during public health crises. In this sense, the text brings elements of the international discussion on the suppression of patents to face the COVID-19 pandemic, updating the debate on territorial sovereignty.

scholarly journals Property and Intellectual Property in Vaccine Markets

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 110-136
Author(s):  
Ana Santos Rutschman
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Public Health Perspective ◽  
Papilloma Virus ◽  
Patent Rights ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Critical Components ◽  
Developed World

As biopharmaceutical forms of technology, vaccines constitute one of the most important tools for the promotion and maintenance of public health. Tolstoy famously wrote that “[h]appy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” Vaccine markets offer perhaps one of the most extreme embodiments of Tolstoy’s principle in the field of biopharmaceutical innovation. Vaccines are often described as one of the most unprofitable types of biopharmaceutical goods, under-incentivized from a research and development (“R&D”) perspective, and routinely failing to attract sufficient investment from traditional funders in biopharma. In this sense, and despite the scientifically well-established value of vaccines from a public health perspective, vaccine markets are often portrayed as a collection of unhappy families. Yet, at least throughout the developed world, there are plenty of examples of steadily profitable vaccine markets, as is the case of recently developed vaccines targeting the human papilloma virus (“HPV”). This Essay begins by mapping the dualism in vaccine R&D and commercialization, describing both “happy” and “unhappy” markets. It then connects the development of new vaccines with the default legal regime to promote innovation in the biopharmaceutical arena: the patent system. In exploring possible solutions for transactional problems arising in connection with the development of vaccine technology, this Essay asks whether the rights covering vaccine technologies are best understood as property rights or as something else. This inquiry is of course but a fragment of a much larger interrogation of the nature and mechanics of intellectual property systems: are intellectual property rights—and rights arising out of the grant of patents in particular—more like property or akin to something else? Arguing that under the current noncommittal position of the Supreme Court there is room for understandings of patent rights that are not property-centric,6 this Essay concludes by exploring how less property-like protection—in the form of a liability regime for critical components of vaccine technology—can remove some of the most salient transactional obstacles to the development and commercialization of new and better vaccines.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document