Timeline of privileges regarding the commercialization and use of knowledge. Part 2: 1980 to 1999
Draft
This is work in progress, and is part of a larger project on timelines. This particular timeline is unfinished, and may contain errors.
Search Results for: freedom of information act
Transparency, cost benefit analysis and de-linkage of cost of R&D from price of the products for Rare and Neglected Pediatric Diseases
Written submission U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Hearing on Treating Rare and Neglected Pediatric Diseases: Promoting the Development of New Treatments and Cures On the topic of Transparency, cost benefit analysis and de-linkage of cost… Continue Reading
WIPO SCCR open ended consultation on the treaty for the blind
I plan to write up a more detailed analysis of the WIPO open ended consultation on the treaty for persons who are blind or have other disabilities. I did want to make a few quick notes, however.
Why is there resistance to prize funds?
I was recently asked the following question:
Jamie
What is your view on the treatment of prize funds? By all standards it is treated as a radical off the wall proposal when in fact it is market based. Why is there so much resistance?
My response was as follows:
PhRMA’s asks regarding special 301, drug pricing and reimbursement
Below are asks from the 2010 PhRMA submission to the USTR Special 301 list on the topic of drug pricing and reimbursement decisions, and described as ‘Market Access Barriers.’ In its assertions, PhRMA attack countries for government price negotiations, making use of reference pricing, the insufficient involvement of pharmaceutical companies in setting government pricing policies and the composition of drug formularies, among other things.
CHINA
KEI comments on U.S.T.R. 2010 Special 301
KEI is one of several public health groups working with Sean Flynn on filing comments in the current U.S.T.R. request for comments on the Special 301 process (Federal Register Notice USTR-2010-0003-0129). In addition, KEI filed these comments:
KEI comments on Special 301
18 February 2010
KEI provides the following comments regarding the 2010 Special 301 Review, including but not limited to the Identification of Countries Under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Our comments include the following points:
The baffling WHO EWG analysis of innovation inducement prizes
The World Health Organization (WHO) Executive Board will soon consider the Executive Summary of the Report of the Expert Working Group on Research and Development Financing, a document, formally identified as EB 126/6 Add.1.
In the section of the report on “Funding allocation proposals,” the EWG considers two types of innovation inducement prizes, including
31 (c) milestone prizes; and
31 (d) end-prizes (cash)
LCA, EFF, and COSLA filed comments regarding the treaty to facilitate access and sharing for people with reading disabilities.
The Library Copyright Alliance (LCA) consists of the American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries and the Association of Research Libraries.
Collectively, the ALA, ACRL and ARL represent over 139,000 libraries in the United States employing approximately 350,000 librarians and other personnel.
Intervention of India at MSF workshop at the WTO Public Forum
India delivered the following intervention at MSF’s workshop at the World Trade Organization Public Forum today. The title of the MSF workshop was “Controversy at customs – the detention of medicines in transit: what impact on access to medicines?”
WTO Public Forum ( MSF event)
Controversy at customs – the detention of medicines in transit: what impact on access to medicines?
Wednesday 30 September 2009, 14:15 to 16:15
WTO building, Room A
KEI statement to 2009 WIPO General Assembly on SCCR work program
The following is the written statement for the record that KEI has provided to the WIPO General Assembly, on the topic of the work program for the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR).
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) recommends that the topic of the broadcast treaty be removed from the SCCR agenda, for the following reasons.