The US trade representative (USTR) has expressed concern at shortcomings in the intellectual property rights (IPR) regimes of both China and India when it comes to investment in pharmaceuticals while noting improvements put in place by both Asian countries.
The USTR’s stance, in a report that analyses IPR issues in 42 countries, seems to be more even-handed than that of the foreign drug makers’ lobby in India, which has claimed that the country lagged behind China in IPR protection.
In the report, the USTR said the overall level of intellectual property theft in China remains unacceptable although it was heartened by positive steps China took in 2009, including the largest software piracy prosecution in Chinese history and an increase in the number of civil IP cases in the courts.
“The US is also deeply troubled by the development of policies that may unfairly disadvantage US rights holders by promoting “indigenous innovation” including through, among other things, preferential government procurement and other measures that could severely restrict market access to foreign technology and products, the USTR report said.
The report also expressed concern about inadequacies in India’s IPR legal framework and enforcement. “Piracy and counterfeiting, including the counterfeiting of medicines, remains widespread, and India’s enforcement regime remains ineffective at addressing this problem,” it said.
It noted, however, that India continues to make “gradual progress on efforts to improve its legislative, administrative, and enforcement infrastructure for IPR”.
“India has made incremental improvements on enforcement, and its IP offices continue to pursue promising modernization efforts,” the USTR said.
The report is largely based on submissions made by various US industry and trade lobbies, including the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the world’s largest pharma lobby.
Global pharma companies, including Swiss drug multinational Novartis AG and US drug maker Eli Lilly and Co., which recently set up research and development facilities in China, have claimed that the key reason for the investments was that China had a strong IPR law.
Novartis global chairman Daniel Vasela, soon after announcing a $1 billion (Rs.45.6 billion) research centre in China in 2009, said in public remarks that India doesn’t have a conducive enough IPR environment to attract investment in research and development.
Such arguments were more of “hype to create pressure on India to go beyond TRIPS”, said Dilip G. Shah, secretary general of the Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance, a domestic industry lobby. TRIPs is short for trade-related intellectual property rights, an agreement that’s part of the World Trade Organization (WTO).
No comments:
Post a Comment