| Autor: |
Patel, Joli |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
UMKC Law Review; Winter2016, Vol. 85 Issue 2, p503-538, 36p |
| Abstrakt: |
Pharmaceutical companies rely on patenting medicines in order to shield their invention from competition and to maximize profits. Pharmaceutical companies use their power and influence to manipulate the patent system in order to extend the lives of their patents. This monopoly stifles the generic market and prevents generic manufacturers from making life-saving medicines more accessible and affordable to patients around the world. The international community struggles to balance the interests of innovators with those of underdeveloped countries relying on cheaper generic versions of medicines. The tension is especially apparent when, often, international laws and treaties conflict with domestic laws. The landmark judgment by India's Supreme Court in Novartis AG v. Union of India & Others is a crucial and controversial step toward preserving the generic market and curbing the practice of "evergreening." Giant pharmaceutical companies roundly criticized the judgment for setting a stringent standard of nonobviousness for patents, but public-health activists praised it. This Comment examines the Indian Supreme Court's interpretation of Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act in Novartis and the international reaction to the Novartis outcome. The Novartis Decision is a watershed moment for India and the developing world-sending a strong message to the giant pharma companies that misuse intellectual property protections at the expense of poor patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
