<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>There is a fascinating chapter by Boldrin and Levine that
destroys the myth that patents encourage innovation in any case in
the area of pharmaceuticals. These two are not anti-capitalist.
Probably fairly conventional politically. But they show how
historically, the introduction of patents stifled innovation and
also that many "best seller" drugs owe nothing at all to
intellectual property.</p>
<p>It is a powerful argument for social justice purposes. I
thoroughly recommend anyone interested in IP in pharma to read
this chapter which you can find at this link to the book.<br>
</p>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fraw.org.uk/library/foss/boldrin_levine_2008.pdf">http://www.fraw.org.uk/library/foss/boldrin_levine_2008.pdf</a><br>
<br>
Best alison<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
<br>
Le 14. 02. 18 à 01:58, Claudio Schuftan a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKpaG8jXghh=adoTuep5pdcHsvLyFj0=kkQ-oJR4WUqtmW2zSQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="Context-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<div>
<div>
<div
class="m_-6412543286625376732ydpe59da14ayiv8427773264yqt7712134210"
id="m_-6412543286625376732ydpe59da14ayiv8427773264yqtfd40957">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><span>Intellectual Property Regime Undermines
Equity, Progress</span><br>
</div>
</div>
<div
class="m_-6412543286625376732ydpe59da14ayiv8427773264ydpbdc79310yahoo_quoted"
id="m_-6412543286625376732ydpe59da14ayiv8427773264ydpbdc79310yahoo_quoted_8756786588">
<div>
<div>
<div
class="m_-6412543286625376732ydpe59da14ayiv8427773264ydp90f836d5yahoo_quoted"
id="m_-6412543286625376732ydpe59da14ayiv8427773264ydp90f836d5yahoo_quoted_9063610914">
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Jomo Kwame Sundaram<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 13
(IPS) - Over the last few decades,
people in the developing world have
been rejecting the intellectual
property (IP) regime as it has been
increasingly imposed on them following
the establishment of the World Trade
Organization (WTO) including its
trade-related intellectual property
rights (TRIPs) regime. IP rights
(IPRs) have been further enforced
through ostensible free trade
agreements (FTAs) and investment
treaties among two (bilateral) or more
(plurilateral) partners.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Despite their ostensible
rationale, the IP standards rich
country governments insist on have
never been intended to maximize
scientific progress and technological
innovation. Rather, the IPR regime
serves to maximize the profits of
influential pharmaceutical and other
companies by conferring them with
exclusive monopoly rights. <br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">In the pushback,
initially led by Nelson Mandela soon
after he became South African
President under the new dispensation
in 1994, developing countries have
targeted access to essential
medicines. Thus, the 2005 Indian law
to conform to the WTO's TRIPs
safeguarded access to generic
equivalents, as allowed for by the
public health exception to TRIPs. <br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">However, the WTO rules
disallow Indian generic manufacturers
from exporting their medicines to
Africa and other poor countries
lacking the necessary pharmaceutical
manufacturing capacities and
capabilities. Even if the African
countries could produce the drugs
domestically, they would be more
expensive as they would lack the
economies of scale required to lower
costs in their relatively small
economies.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Privatizing knowledge<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">In Innovation,
Intellectual Property and Development,
Joseph Stiglitz, Dean Baker and Arjun
Jayadev have shown that the economic
institutions and laws protecting
knowledge in OECD economies not only
poorly govern economic activity, but
are also especially ill-suited to
developing countries' needs,
especially the global commitment to
achieving universal health care of
Agenda 2030, the Sustainable
Development Goals.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">From an economic
perspective, knowledge is considered a
global public good, as the marginal
cost of anyone using it is zero.
Growth of knowledge can presumably
improve wellbeing. <br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Despite lack of evidence,
the IP advocacy argument has been that
market forces ‘undersupply' knowledge
owing to the poor incentives for
research and innovation. The usual
claim is that this ‘market failure' is
best corrected by providing a private
monopoly through property rights for
new knowledge, e.g., through
enforceable patent rights. Private IP
protection is presumed to be the only
one way to reward, and thus encourage
research and innovation. <br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">The trio argue that the
IP regime has been much more
problematic than expected, even in
rich countries. They show how the 2013
US Supreme Court decision that
naturally occurring genes cannot be
patented has shown that the IP regime
impedes, rather than stimulates
research by limiting access to
knowledge. Following the ruling,
innovation accelerated, leading to
better diagnostic tests (e.g., for
genes related to breast cancer) at
much lower cost.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Alternatives<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Stiglitz, Baker and
Jayadev focus on three alternatives to
motivate and finance research in the
US context. First, through centralized
mechanisms to directly support
research. Second, by decentralizing
direct funding, e.g., via tax credits;
government bodies or research
foundations or institutions can reward
successful innovations or findings.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">The patent system rewards
legal ownership of innovation, but
effectively impedes the use of that
knowledge by others, thus reducing its
potential benefits. Having a creative
commons, e.g., open-source software,
would maximize the flow of knowledge.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">The trio recommend that
developing economies use all these
approaches to promote learning and
innovation. They view the gap between
developing and developed countries as
involving a gap in knowledge
comparable to the gap in resources. <br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Hence, to improve
economic welfare in the world, they
urge diffusion of knowledge from
developed to developing countries, as
conventional social scientists have
urged as part of modernization theory
for more than half a century.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Often dense ‘patent
thickets', requiring many patents, are
increasingly stifling innovation.
Payments to lawyers and patent
investigators typically exceed those
to scientific researchers in such
cases, with research often oriented to
extend, broaden and leverage monopoly
rights due to patents.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">One perverse consequence
has been patent ‘trolling' by
speculators who buy up patents which
they think has a chance of being
necessary for any product or process
innovation. Thus becoming gatekeepers
like the mythical trolls, they
effectively block innovation unless
their price is met.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Neo-liberal monopolies<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Ironically, while the
case for more openness in sharing
knowledge is compelling,
‘neo-liberals' -- who typically claim
the moral high ground in opposing
monopolies and related market
distortions -- have effectively served
to extend and strengthen property
rights and attendant monopolies. <br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Powerful corporate and
developed economy government lobbies
have influenced the IP regime, e.g.,
by opposing competing rights
associated with nature, biodiversity
or even traditional knowledge. <br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Hence, recent ostensible
FTAs have extended IPRs to cover
‘biologics', i.e., naturally occurring
substances, such as insulin for those
suffering from diabetes, which is
derived from mammals. <br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Thus, over the last few
decades, the evolving IP regime has
erected more and more barriers to
widespread use of new knowledge. The
current IP regime serves to maximize
profits for a few monopolies, e.g.,
‘Big Pharma', rather than the progress
and welfare of the many. <br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Widespread strictly
enforced IP protection is historically
new. IP protections came very late to
the early industrializing economies,
typically delayed to enable rapid
‘catch-up' industrialization and
technological change.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">The ‘weightless economy'
of data, information and knowledge is
accounting for a growing share of
economic value in the world. Stiglitz,
Baker and Jayadev argue that existing
rules governing global knowledge serve
as fetters that must be broken to
reflect these realities.<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">***<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">------------------------------<wbr>---------<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Related Links<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Visit this story at <a
shape="rect"
href="http://ipsnews.net/2018/02/intellectual-property-regime-undermines-equity-progress"
rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://ipsnews.net/2018/02/<wbr>intellectual-property-regime-<wbr>undermines-equity-progress</a><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
PHM-Exchange People's Health Movement
- To post, write to: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:PHM-Exchange@phm.phmovement.org">PHM-Exchange@phm.phmovement.org</a>
- To view the archive, receive one weekly posting with all the week's postings, edit your subscription's options or unsubscribe, please go to the PHM-Exchange webpage: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://phm.phmovement.org/listinfo.cgi/phm-exchange-phmovement.org">http://phm.phmovement.org/listinfo.cgi/phm-exchange-phmovement.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>