“Patent News Bulletin: Indian Patent Statistics, Indian Industrial Design Statistics, Interesting Inventions, Highlights of the 12th Edition of the Global Innovation Index 2019, Delhi High Court grants interim relief to Natco Pharma Ltd; Vodafone joins LTE patent pool of Via Licensing Corporation; KIPO observes filings of 16,991 PCT Applications, in 2018, China launches the establishment of a National Centre that offers guidance on IP related disputes and other news updates”, presented to you by the Patent attorneys and experts of…
Earlier this week, the words, “Compulsory License”, “Section 84” and “Indian pharma” once again made the headlines. This time however, it wasn’t a new case being brought forth; instead it was the decision to bury two old ones.
The news reports suggested that two Indian drugmakers had given up a battle to copy drugs developed by Bristol Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca, blaming a lack of government support for cheap generics and pressure from Big Pharma. The two Indian drug makers…
Mark Twain once said “Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please”. How is this relevant to this Compulsory Licensing post here? You need to read on to discover that.
The history of Compulsory Licensing can be traced back to the UK Statute of Monopolies in 1624, which ruled out monopolies associated with patent, and stated that grants should not be mischievous to the State‘ or hurt trade. The UK recognized compulsory licensing in terms of…
Compulsory licensing cases and India have a peculiar relationship. They are in a way, soul sisters in the world of Intellectual property. Section 84 of the Patents Act, 1970 has always been the subject of intense debate. It hasn’t been very long since India issued its first ever compulsory licence to Natco Pharma, an Indian generic company, for Bayer’s blockbuster anti-cancer drug Nexavar (Sorafenib) in March 2012. Two other CL applications followed the Nexavar case, one relating to Roche’s Herceptin…