Pros And Cons Of Compulsory License

except that enjoyed by a virtue of a patent granted by the United States”. This quote suggests

“The right conferred by the patent grant is, in the language of the statute and of the grant itself, “the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling” the invention in the United States or “importing” the invention into the United States. What is granted is not the right to make, use, offer for sale, sell or import, but the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the invention. Once a patent is issued, the patentee must enforce the patent without aid of the USPTO” (ALEXANDRIA 1).

Although the need to protect R & D investment is recognized, there appears to be a need to modernize the laws around intellectual property. What if the original patent owner is unable to continue development in a timely fashion, or chooses to withhold development of a product? Should the patent remain with the owner for the full amount of time if they are unable or choose not to produce an item that has a significant potential to improve lives, public safety or advance technology? What about

Under TRIPS, until a pharmaceutical patent is actually granted, a country has no obligation to protect potential prospective rights (during the pendency of the

Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution provides the federal government with the power to issue patents and copyrights in order “to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries” (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8). A patent provides the inventor with an exclusive right to “use, license or sell and invention,” (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8), as such the product, service, process or design becomes the personal property of the inventor(s).

It is intended both to provide thumbnail descriptions of the various intellectual property regimes to economists working in this area and to indicate where additional economic research might be useful. The other papers in this symposium provide important examples of ongoing research on the economics of intellectual property. Suzanne Scotchmer analyzes the complex effects of patent protection when innovation is cumulative. Rather than analyzing situations in which several firms vie to develop the same innovation-the approach of the "patent race" literature-her analysis examines circumstances in which only one firm can develop an initial innovation but others can also build upon it. She focuses on how the incentive to develop both the initial and subsequent inventions may be affected by the scope of patent protection. Janusz Ordover considers ways of adjusting the patent system that may help to both provide returns to the inventor, and encourage the diffusion of the innovation in the economy. His paper is part of a line of work that explores the place of the intellectual property system among the large number of institutions that affect the amount and nature of research and development that takes place. In the final paper, David

Uncertain duration. Protection of trade secret can be lost when they are no longer considered secrets, patent rights can be filed within one year time frame after such loss of status.

Second, to ensure a maximum benefit to the public, drafters included a federal “March-in Right”. If a university “has not taken, or is not expected to take within a reasonable time, effective steps to achieve practical application of the subject invention[,]” the government may invoke its march-in right. Under this provision, agencies can require a university or exclusive licensee of a subject invention to license the subject invention to any responsible applicant.

patent protection life from the time that product is for sale in the market. Success of the

A patent is an exclusive right granted for an invention, product or process that provides a new way of doing something, or that offers a new technical solution to a problem. An invention in general must fulfill certain criteria in order to be protected by a patent. For example, the Patents Act, 1970 in S. 2(1) (j) defines invention as a new product or process involving an inventive step and capable of industrial application. In other words, an invention in order to be patentable must show an element of novelty, must show “an inventive step”, and must be of practical use. Particularly, the Patents Act, 1970 defines “inventive step” as a feature of an invention that involves technical advance as compared to the existing knowledge or having economic significance or both and that makes the invention not obvious to a person skilled in the art. In other words, patent rights are not available for new advances that are merely obvious extensions or modifications of prior designs. Besides, the requirement of difference over prior art, there is a requirement to establish the extent of common general knowledge that exists while

Therefore, protection of patents is one of the key conditions necessary for further development of the pharmaceutical industry. At the same time, non-efficient legislation that does not provide the necessary level of patent protection is one of the factors that hamper expansion of “Big Pharmaceutical” companies to the developing countries8.

Failure to work a patent failure to work a patent might be discussed under the context of article 7 of the TRIPS Agreement, as Professor Gervais indicates. A number of supporters of the local working requirement argue if the patentee would be entitled to a territorial legal monopoly, she should to contribute to the development of the industry in that territory as an act of reciprocity. Nonetheless, K. McCabe explains the reason why defining the working requirement would be a burden for transnational companies. If comprehensively every country requires local working as one of the requirements for granting a patent, then exportation to a new foreign market means to establish a manufacturing facility in the country. Defining local working as a “requirement” therefore constitutes an unnecessary burden for a foreign patentee to build manufacturing facilities in all the signatories of TRIPS who have legislation as such. For this reason, the grounds for granting compulsory licenses should be limited to countries with a lower standard of technology

According to article 25 of the Patent Law, there are certain exclusions of product and inventions to which the Chinese government refuses to grant a patent right. The list is as follows: 2

Cipla should look to protect their patents on particular medications and explains why rules governing intellectual property rights in industrialized nations should not apply to poorer countries.

As per the main TRIPS Agreement the government of the country where the patent is registered was allowed to authorize the supply of the product only for domestic market without the consent of the patent owner. Amendment to the TRIPS agreement introduced the compulsory license exception, which allows countries to allow production and sale of patented pharmaceutical products to least developed countries, and to countries that requested the application of compulsory license exception, without the patent holder’s consent.