India Finally Bows To US Pressure: Promises Not To Use Compulsory Licensing For Drugs
from the declaration-of-war-on-poor-cancer-patients dept
Techdirt has been covering India's complex relationship with pharma patents since at least 2009. In particular, we've been following for years India's use of compulsory licenses to provide its people with access to life-saving drugs at affordable prices. Naturally, Big Pharma companies in both the US and EU hate that, not least because it might encourage other countries to do the same. As a result, the US pharmaceutical industry in particular has been applying political pressure to get India to stop using compulsory licenses, even though they are a perfectly legitimate policy tool under the WTO TRIPS Agreement. Two years ago, Techdirt noted that India was already becoming more cautious on the compulsory licensing front, and a new report from Reuters suggests it may finally have bowed to US pressure:
India has given private assurances that it will not grant licences allowing local firms to override patents and make cheap copies of drugs by big Western drugmakers, a U.S. business advocacy group said.
There's been no official confirmation from the Indian government of that decision, nor an explanation of why it has decided to give in, assuming it has. The Reuters article mentions the fact that India had been placed for two years in a row on the infamous Special 301 Report's "Priority Watch List". That's one of the favorite ways in which PhRMA, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, tries to bully countries -- or even entire continents -- into doing its bidding. But giving up compulsory licenses just to stay off the Special 301 naughty step seems an incredibly high price to pay, for reasons explained by Knowledge Ecology International (KEI):
The comments were revealed in a submission last month by the U.S.-India Business Council (USIBC) to the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), which is reviewing global intellectual property laws for an annual report identifying trade barriers to U.S. companies."If such an agreement [between the Indian government and the US drug industry] in fact exists, this is extremely troubling news ... this sort of pressure is basically a declaration of war on poor cancer patients," KEI said in its own submission to the USTR last week.
Given the USIBC document that Reuters says it has seen, it seems likely that the Indian government has indeed given some sort of assurance to the US companies. But the fact that it has been kept quiet shows that the politicians are fully aware of how unpopular the move will be once the Indian public finds out about it. That provides some hope the policy could be reversed if enough people in India start complaining, as happened recently with software patents.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: compulsory licenses, drugs, health, india, pharmaceuticals, trips, wto
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Filthy 'Muricans, always spreading their influence to the rest of the world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
As usual things are going in the absolutely wrong direction.
It's a classic case of market failure. People can not not get healthcare, unless they want to suffer and die. Without strong regulations, including price controls, the prices will just keep going up. Great if you are in the industry, disastrous for sick people and the economy in general. It's quite literally a case of; your money or your life.
Whether or not the Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obamacare) is working is irrelevant. Even if it is, it's trying to solve the wrong problem. The problem isn't that there is a lack of universal health insurance, it's that there's a lack of universal (and affordable) health coverage.
Having a health insurance plan with for example a $10,000 deductible, 80% coinsurance, no prescription coverage, and very few doctors that will take it, isn't much better than no coverage at all. With no coverage, at least you are saving on the premiums and you know more doctors will see you.
When Vermont tried single payer, it wasn't the single payer part that doomed it, it was giving everyone coverage without having a way to contain healthcare costs.
India shouldn't be giving up on using generics to produce reasonably priced medicine for its people. Instead the United States should be emulating India and making more use of compulsory licenses here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: As usual things are going in the absolutely wrong direction.
The big yodel about government assistance to those who can not afford the insurance costs, is not sustainable either. They will only give aid to the lowest plan, which means the highest deductibles for those who have to use the assistance. Due the high deductible costs, it's next to unusable without bankrupting the one needing to use the services to get medical attention. One thing you can be sure of, it's not going to get cheaper.
Within a few years, medical insurance will not be affordable nor will it cover many things. Costs will drive the insurance companies to rule out procedures as too expensive to do, while premiums will continue to go sky high till no one can afford them. The not too far off future sees medical as taking as much as 20% of the GDP.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: As usual things are going in the absolutely wrong direction.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
US bullies people around, more news at 16:00
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: As usual things are going in the absolutely wrong direction.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: As usual things are going in the absolutely wrong direction.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: As usual things are going in the absolutely wrong direction.
In not so many words, this is the end result of our petty "Regulate Everything" mentality and the constant assault on Free Market.
America does not have a free market anymore, but people will still assault "Capitalism" like it is still in full swing. The market is an Oligarchy and every request for more government regulation consolidates that fact.
Get rid of most regulation and instead institute strong anti-monopoly & anti-trust laws to combat the negatives of a Capitalist market.
The reason people feel like Capitalism was not working is because we have not had it for a long fucking time! Sure some areas are still capitalistic, like the video game market, but healthcare has been an Oligarchy before anyone of us was born.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: As usual things are going in the absolutely wrong direction.
If you're talking about the so-called subsidies to low income folks, there's a trap nobody wants to talk about: said subsidies are considered taxable income to the recipients! I bet a lot of people were surprised to get a 1099 form for that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
So what if America buys them off?
If they want to fix their country they can put a stop to it, the people get the government they deserve.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Abraham Lincoln
First Inaugural Address
Monday, March 4, 1861
Are we weary yet?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Public costs, private profits.
The Free Market is a myth. Always was, always will be. Capitalism is a nice prod, an incentive to put a little life into an economy. Just like a game of monopoly, capitalism hates a free market. The end result of a successful capitalistic system, is one person owning everything and everyone else slaves to the winner. Just take a look at Standard Oil, the Great Depression, etc. to see where a lack of regulation gets you.
Even those who advocate for a freer market understand that there are certain situations where the market will fail. Natural monopolies are one, it's terribly inefficient to have a dozen water pipes into everyone's home, and physically impossible to have a hundred roads between two villages. Healthcare is another area where the free market is ill equipped to function.
You can choose to buy Pepsi over Coke, or something else entirely based on the price/value that a particular company brings to the table. Competition between producers vying for consumers dollars. But even here, there need to be basic rules (regulations). If Coke stole all of its ingredients and utilized slave labourers it could probably produce it's product much cheaper than Pepsi. That's what a truly free market would allow. So even in areas amenable to market forces, there need to be some regulations.
Healthcare is something that when you need it you either get it or you die. There is no doing without, at least not for long. In addition, the people allowed to provide healthcare is heavily regulated, not just anyone can perform cardiac surgery (nor should they). Patents, a government granted monopoly [a.k.a. regulation] prohibits competitors from creating lower cost versions of life saving medicines. Which is the subject of the original article. Pharma is using regulations to stifle the Free Market driving up the cost of medicines in India.
So if you truly wanted the free market to dictate health care, you would have to be prepared for lots of people to suffer and die. As scrooge would have said we would just be removing some of the surplus population.
Hopefully you can see that the problem isn't an end result of our:
It's the result of the wrong regulation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: As usual things are going in the absolutely wrong direction.
Also, about 90% of all prescriptions filled in the US are generics.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Thinking long-term
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Thinking long-term
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If you want only generic drugs, that is fine, but I like modern medicine, not 20 year old medicine.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Thinking long-term
What profits do the US companies get from no sales in India?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Thinking long-term
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Haha
We are past peak-HIV infections, past polio so there is no need for such drastic measures (remember Compulsory licenses are of last legal resort) to risk investments in other IP related sectors.
But there will come a time when India's economic clout expands, coupled with an explosion of chronic conditions like diabetes or hearts attacks, then those circumstances will force the hand of this very Govt. to issue CLs for life saving drugs.
-Pharma Management Consultant
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Thinking long-term
From a previous article:
... India has granted just such a compulsory license, covering a kidney and liver cancer drug marketed under the name Nexavar. Indian generic drug company Natco requested a license, noting that Nexavar was in short supply in India and exceptionally expensive. A typical dosage costs around $70,000 per year in India -- something Bayer says is necessary to recoup the drug's R&D costs. However, reports show that it cost less than $300 million to develop this drug (not to mention that the US government subsidized the process) and Bayer has already made billions selling the drug around the world. In a detailed ruling, India's Controller of Patents (nice title) granted Natco the right to make the same drug, requiring it to sell it at a significantly lower price than Bayer sells Nexavar for, and then pay back to Bayer a 6% royalty rate (which is actually at the high end of what the UN recommends).
Compulsory licenses means the original company still gets paid, they just aren't getting the absurd amounts they otherwise might get, from drugs priced completely out of range for most people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Does this make the US the schmeikl of the world?
[ link to this | view in thread ]