Archive for January, 2006

Plavix may be copied…

Sanofi’s antri-stroke drug may be copied by Canadian generic maker Apotex (others such as Indian’s Dr Reddy are contending too). Sanofi, however may very well detain a valid patent on the Plavix. What’s the lesson ?

First, Sanofi’s patent may very well be an illusory protection. Apotex may be crushed by Sanofi in a court of justice, or may be not. Certainly, if you’re holding Sanofi shares (as well as Apotex), you should be cautious about what they’re worth.

Second, drugs are paid in many places, at least in part, with public money. Or health protection system, but this is the same. In the end, the state is the ultimate health guarantee for the citizens, and hence picks up the ultimate bill. This is also true when trying to bring health protection in third world countries, where IP may very well looks like a rich country problem, that is, a secondary one.

The bottom line ? Drug patents are weak. Governments want cheap drugs, because they’re out of money to pay for it, be it in poor or not-so-poor countries. Whatever they say, they could withdraw their support as soon as they’re in political trouble on some front they would give a higher priority. And without legislative power behind it, a legally-build monopoly, such as a patent, is a monopoly that can’t be enforced. A beast that shouldn’t valued too much…

Comments

“There’s an R&D crisis” (in pharma)

Seen on ip-watch, a comment by Ellen ‘t Hoen of Médecins Sans Frontières: “I hope that the CIPIH report also gives clear guidance to both WHO and countries on how to tackle the health R&D crisis while ensuring that essential health products become affordable and available.”

This means there’s a crisis. Is IP the source of this crisis ? Can IP be used as a useful tool to get out of it ?

Comments

Beware software patents… and IP in general.

Actually, I refuse the vocable “Intellectual property”, which let people think that you can own intellectual stuff the way you own a car. “Exploitation monopoly” is the real word for what they call IP.

Note that I don’t despise these monopolies as a whole (I’m the owner of a few of them myself). Actually, I believe part of the problem is to put things as remote as a trademark, a patent, a song, the recording of the song, etc… all together in the same bag. Having a clear separation of these very differents rights is, in my non-lawyer humble opinion, a real and interesting challenge for the lawyers of the 21st century.

Comments

BlackBerry users to get 30-day warning of shutdown…

Source: out-law.com, http://www.out-law.com/default.aspx?page=6552

Funny how a company that produces no service (NTP) can shut down another company that provides the real service (RIM). Certainly, I’m utterly naive, but it’s hard to think that patents can help innovation in this way.

One may argue that this is what patents are about. Protecting the innovator against big money so that she can develop her invention. NTP, however, has never even tried to build a prototype. Or raised money to do so. This isn’t surprising: a few “details” patents aren’t a full-scale service, not by a long shot. The effort of RIM is far stronger than NTP’s one.
So is it patent ambush or just a bargaining muscle flexion on both part ? However, would it be reasonnable to let the owner of the mere drawing of a new screw kills a successful automotive manufacturer ?

Comments

A blog on my attempt to blog

The original post is at http://tronche.com/blog/?p=3

Comments

Un nouveau post

Mais un post en deux langues.

Comments

J’ai installé WordPress…

Mambo me semblait très câblé. Wordpress n’est pas loin derrière, mais il semble plus simple…

Comments (1)