Selected topics

Support KEI's work with a donation.

Recent blogs

Impact of the HIF on generic industry in developing countries

This is an exchange from the ip-health list, that will be updated as the conversation continues, about the impact of the HIF on the generic drug industry developing countries.

—– Original Message —–
From: “James Love”
To: “Ip-health”
Cc: “Thomas Pogge” “Aidan Hollis”
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 2:15 PM
Subject: impact of the HIF on generic industry in developing countries

Why the HIF rejected open licensing

In an exchange on the i+a listserve, I asked Professor Pogge if the decision to reject open licensing was in part because he was concerned about opposition from certain elements of the pharmaceutical industry. This was his response, shared here with permission:

From Bamako: WHO strategy on research for health

The Global Ministerial Forum on Research for Health is meeting in Bamako, Mali from November 17-19, 2008. This Ministerial is organized by the Council on Health Research for Development (COHRED), Global Forum for Health Research, the Republic of Mali, the United Nations Cultural, Scientific and Educational Organization (UNESCO), the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), and coordinated by the Bamako 2008 Secretariat.

Excerpts from HIF: compulsory licensing

In their recent book on the Health Impact Fund,* Aidan Hollis and Thomas Pogge discuss a number of issues. This is what they say about compulsory licensing of patents.

Page 53-54

HIF on the Sanders prize fund bill

In their recent book on the Health Impact Fund,* Aidan Hollis and Thomas Pogge discuss a number of issues. This is what they say about S.2210 (110th Congress), Senator Sanders’ proposal for the Medical Innovation Prize Fund.

Page 105-106

Medical Innovation Prize Act of 2007

HIF on why voluntary licensing of patents is not required

In book on the Health Impact Fund,* Aidan Hollis and Thomas Pogge discuss why voluntary licensing of patents is not required.

Page 22

Voluntary Licensing

HIF on Intellectual Property

Aidan Hollis and Thomas Pogge discuss Intellectual Property and the HIF.*

Intellectual Property

The Health Impact Fund and product monopolies

KEI will later issue a more detailed comment on the Health Impact Fund. One of the key issues that will be addressed is the way that Hollis and Pogge propose turning the prize fund proposals that are based upon open licensing of patents into something that reinforces the monopoly supply chain.

We understand that one motivation for doing this was to attract support from some large pharmaceutical companies, and the European governments that protect them.

KEI reaction to composition of WHO Expert Working Group on R&D financing

WHO has announced the names for the Expert Working Group on R&D financing

We don’t know everyone on the list, but for the people that we do know, we are generally impressed. The WHO seems to have created a body with considerable expertise and reputation, and included people who will consider new ideas. This seems like a very good start.

November 13, 2008. KEI brownbag on US Priority Review Voucher

At KEI Washington, DC offices

US Priority Review Voucher

Time: 12:00pm-2:30pm, Thursday, 13 November 2008
Knowledge Ecology International (formerly CPTech)
1621 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 500 (5th Floor)
Washington DC, 20009
Tel: +1 202 332 2670


Aaron Kesselheim , Brigham and Women's Hospital/Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard University
David Ridley , The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University
James Love, KEI

Unpacking the WIPO SCCR Limitations and Exceptions (to copyright) agenda

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) divides its norm setting work among several committees. The 17th meeting of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) met last week, and considered several topics, including the first in-depth effort to consider a work program on limitations and exceptions for copyright. This work program, first proposed formally by Chile (SCCR/13/5) among WIPO member states, is a work in progress.

WIPO’s press release for SCCR 17, what isn’t said says something

Two quick points about the WIPO press release for SCCR 17:

1. The press release does not mention the term “trans-border” (a reference to export and import), even though this was referred to in the context of L&E for distance education in the SCCR conclusions. Clearly the EU opposition to the New Zealand text on “application to the international exchange of materials in accessible formats” made an impression on the WIPO Secretariat.

Pictures from SCCR 17

SCCR 17 final agreed upon text on persons with reading disabilities

Below is the final agreed upon text for the SCCR 17 on the issue of access for persons with reading disabilities. There are four sentences, in one paragraph.

SCCR draft conclusions — influenced by right-owners, ignore WBU proposal

WIPO has just released at 8:50 am, “draft conclusions of the SCCR.”

The section on limitations and exceptions was good in some areas, for example, when the committee “stressed the importance of the forthcoming study on exceptions and limitations for the benefit of educational activities, including distance education and the trans-border aspect therof, and that it should include developing and least developed countries.”

Syndicate content