The international patent system and biomedical research: Reconciling aspiration, policy and practice

AAPS Journal

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 526-536

  Taubman, Antony ^a,b,c  

^a WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION   (Switzerland)

^b AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c NONE

Author keywords

International patent law; Pharmaceutical innovation

Indexed keywords

RECOMBINANT RELAXIN; RELAXIN; DRUG;

BIOETHICS; BIOMEDICINE; BIOTECHNOLOGY; COURT; DISEASE CONTROL; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG LEGISLATION; DRUG QUALITY; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG SCREENING; DRUG SYNTHESIS; EUROPEAN UNION; FORGERY; GENETIC RECOMBINATION; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HEALTH PROMOTION; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; MEDICAL CARE; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; MOLECULAR BIOLOGY; PATENT; PHARMACEUTICAL CARE; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; SOCIOECONOMICS; STANDARDIZATION; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION; ARTICLE; ECONOMICS; GEOGRAPHY; HEALTH; HEALTH CARE POLICY; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAL RESEARCH; SOCIAL SECURITY;

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE DISCIPLINES; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; GEOGRAPHY; HEALTH; HEALTH POLICY; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; PATENTS AS TOPIC; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; SOCIAL SECURITY; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

EID: 65549088149     PISSN: 15507416     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1208/s12248-008-9049-0     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. Abbott, F.M. 2005. Toward a new era of objective assessment in the field of TRIPS and variable geometry for the preservation of multilateralism (March 2005). Journal of International Economic Law 8(1): 77-100. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=915556.
2. Preamble of TRIPS, "[r]ecognizing that intellectual property rights are private rights".
3. Taubman, Antony. 2004. Public-private management of intellectual property for public health outcomes in the developing world the lessons of access conditions in research and development agreements. Geneva: The Initiative on Public-Private Partnerships for Health (IPPPH).
4. Chokshi, D.A. 2006. Improving access to medicines in poor countries: The role of universities. PLoS Med 3(6): 136. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pmed.0030136.
5. WIPO patent report 2006, at http://www.wipo.int/freepublications/en/ patents/931/wipo_pub_931.pdf.
6. Agreement on trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights (1994) art. 8.
7. Taubman, A. 2003. Collective Management of Trips: APEC, New Regionalism and Intellectual Property. http://dspace.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/43004.
8. Declaration on the TRIPS agreement and public health (14 November, 2001) No. WT/MIN(01)/DEC/2.
9. Improvement in brewing beer and ale pasteurization (US Patent 135,245).
10. Paris Convention, art. 1.
11. Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions, 1998 O.J. (L 213) 13 ('EU Biotech Directive') art. 5.2.
12. U.S. Supreme Court. Atlantic Works v. Brady, 107 U.S. 192 (1883). http://supreme.justia.com/us/107/192/case.html.
13. U.S. Supreme Court. Slawson v. Grand Street R. Co., 107 U.S. 649 (1883). http://supreme.justia.com/us/107/649/case.html.
14. U.S. Supreme Court. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp., 340 U.S. 147 (1950). http://supreme.justia.com/us/340/ 147/.
15. U.S. Supreme Court. Mazer v. Stein, 347 U.S. 201 (1954). http://supreme.justia.com/us/347/201/case.html.
16. TRIPS art 27 http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/ 27-trips_04c_e.htm.
17. IP/C/W/442 (18 March 2005).
18. TRIPS art 27.1.
19. TRIPS art 27.2.
20. TRIPS art 27.3.
21. Note prepared by the International Bureau of WIPO, MTN. GNG/NG11/W/24 (5 May 1988).
22. PCT, art. 1.
23. PCT, art. 16.
24. Patent Cooperation Treaty, art. 27.3.
25. WIPO's Gateway to Patent Services and Activities. www.wipo.int/ patentscope.
26. Statute of Monopolies 1623 (c.3 21_Ja_1), An Act concerning Monopolies and Dispensations with penall Lawes and the Forfeyture thereof. http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?activeTextDocId=1518308.
27. Parke-Davis & Co. v. H. K. Mulford & Co., 189 F. 95, 103 (S.D.N.Y. 1911).
28. Amgen, Inc. v. Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. 927 F.2d 1200, 1206 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
29. EU Biotech Directive, art. 5.2.
30. Utility Examination Guidelines, 66 Fed. Reg. 1092, 1098 (5 Jan 2001).
31. Indian Patent Law, s.3j.
32. e.g. Andean Community Decision 486: Article 21.
33. The Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005, No. 15 of 2005, para 3.
34. USC § 103(b).
35. CIPIH p 147.
36. Biotech Directive art 4.
37. Howard Florey/Relaxin (1995) EPOR 541.
38. Patent EP 0101309, Howard Florey Institute.
39. Seibold, JR. 2000. Recombinant human relaxin in the treatment of scleroderma. Annals of Internal Medicine, 132:871-879.
40. Howard Florey/Relaxin (1995) EPOR 541, Ibid, 548.
41. Australia Law Reform Commission (2003). Issue Paper 27: Gene Patenting and Human Health. http://www.WHO.Int/Genomics/Elsi/Regulatory_Data/ Region/Wpro/126/En/Index.Html.
42. Claes, T. 2000. Cultural background of the ethical and social debate about biotechnology. In Biotechnology, patents and morality, ed. S. Sterckx, 179-182. Aldershot: Ashgate.
43. Schrecker, T. et al. 1997. Ethical issues associated with the patenting of higher life forms. Montreal: Westminster Institute for Ethics and Human Values, McGill Centre for Medicine Ethics and Law. www.strategis.ic.gc.ca/pics/ip/schrecef.pdf.
44. Keays, D. 1999. Patenting DNA and amino acid sequences: An Australian perspective. Health Law Journal 7:69-76.