There appears to be some confusion.
Mr. Hatch ( probably the hatch-Waxman-Act fame ) is putting pressure on US govt by saying that India has done some IP violations during international trade. This happened on 30th April . See here
Beats me which violations ? Does anybody know ?
Where is the confusion ?
PM said that a newly formed "IPR think tank" had been set set up and its 'suggestions' will be adopted. Interestingly the three member committee initially set up in July 2014 (which released a draft report See here .) was arbitrarily scrapped 3 days after its report ( now scrapped) was filed and a new 6 member team was formed which submitted a 30 page report in December 2014 read here . PM has been referring to this draft but the 'suggestion' are not known in public domain.
It is speculated that the suggestions shall comprise Data Exclusivity and Patent Linkage which in fact are TRIPS plus provisions.
Commerce and Industry minister Ms. Sitharaman says that Indian IP law is strong enough and in compliance with TRIPS . see here
On one side PM wants to revise the IPR policy whereas the commerce minister stands by the present policy. This is the confusion.
We await how the future unfolds.
What is not confusing for sure though ..is that ...the pharmaceutical business is behind this & the Section 3d... which nails the 20 year patent monopolies applied for through claiming incrementally derived synthetic modifications to the existing drugs which fail to document enhancement (at least 30%, do not recollect where did I find this number ..but it does exist somewhere in relevant literature, I will have to dig..) in desired net therapeutic effect.
If the slumdogs of the third world could innovate with the Joneses residing in economies where Iyn Rand still rules the minds ...that is the question.
Is India really ready to face the challenges of brave new market forces ? Can India hinder the wrongful diversion of material made under compulsory licence ? How long can India hide behind the excuses of accessibility / affordability and yet wish to benefit from the outcome of innovative efforts carried out in large MNCs ?
Mr. Hatch ( probably the hatch-Waxman-Act fame ) is putting pressure on US govt by saying that India has done some IP violations during international trade. This happened on 30th April . See here
Beats me which violations ? Does anybody know ?
Where is the confusion ?
PM said that a newly formed "IPR think tank" had been set set up and its 'suggestions' will be adopted. Interestingly the three member committee initially set up in July 2014 (which released a draft report See here .) was arbitrarily scrapped 3 days after its report ( now scrapped) was filed and a new 6 member team was formed which submitted a 30 page report in December 2014 read here . PM has been referring to this draft but the 'suggestion' are not known in public domain.
It is speculated that the suggestions shall comprise Data Exclusivity and Patent Linkage which in fact are TRIPS plus provisions.
Commerce and Industry minister Ms. Sitharaman says that Indian IP law is strong enough and in compliance with TRIPS . see here
On one side PM wants to revise the IPR policy whereas the commerce minister stands by the present policy. This is the confusion.
We await how the future unfolds.
What is not confusing for sure though ..is that ...the pharmaceutical business is behind this & the Section 3d... which nails the 20 year patent monopolies applied for through claiming incrementally derived synthetic modifications to the existing drugs which fail to document enhancement (at least 30%, do not recollect where did I find this number ..but it does exist somewhere in relevant literature, I will have to dig..) in desired net therapeutic effect.
If the slumdogs of the third world could innovate with the Joneses residing in economies where Iyn Rand still rules the minds ...that is the question.
Is India really ready to face the challenges of brave new market forces ? Can India hinder the wrongful diversion of material made under compulsory licence ? How long can India hide behind the excuses of accessibility / affordability and yet wish to benefit from the outcome of innovative efforts carried out in large MNCs ?
