TRIPs Meets AmyX: Does TRIPs Ameliorate or Exacerbate Imbalance in Pharmaceutical Development and Pricing?
Panel
Panel 2: IP, Trade and Access
Moderator
Henry Liao, Partner, Schinders Law
Description
The World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspect of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) was intended to universalize the protection of intellectual property rights, with special regard to their international trade-related aspects. Among other things, TRIPS mandated national treatment (art. 3) and most-favored-national treatment (art 4) with regard to the protection of intellectual property of nationals of all WTO member states. The belief and motive force behind the agreement was that "protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights should contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and to the transfer and dissemination of technology. . . ." (art.7) It is not at all clear that the post-Uruguay Round international regime has genuinely tended to support the objectives, even after the entry into force in January 2017 new TRIPS Article 31 bis, to encourage "production and export of affordable generic medicines to other [WTO member states] that cannot domestically produce the needed medicines in sufficient quantities. . . ." This paper seeks to examine the structure and objectives of TRIPS in relation to pharma development and pricing, to analyze the practical effects of the agreement on the international pharma market, and to assess the likelihood that the amended TRIPS will ameliorate any shortcomings in the achievement of its fundamental objectives.
Location
Pacific McGeorge School of Law, Lecture Hall, 3200 Fifth Ave., Sacramento, CA
TRIPs Meets AmyX: Does TRIPs Ameliorate or Exacerbate Imbalance in Pharmaceutical Development and Pricing?
Pacific McGeorge School of Law, Lecture Hall, 3200 Fifth Ave., Sacramento, CA
The World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspect of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) was intended to universalize the protection of intellectual property rights, with special regard to their international trade-related aspects. Among other things, TRIPS mandated national treatment (art. 3) and most-favored-national treatment (art 4) with regard to the protection of intellectual property of nationals of all WTO member states. The belief and motive force behind the agreement was that "protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights should contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and to the transfer and dissemination of technology. . . ." (art.7) It is not at all clear that the post-Uruguay Round international regime has genuinely tended to support the objectives, even after the entry into force in January 2017 new TRIPS Article 31 bis, to encourage "production and export of affordable generic medicines to other [WTO member states] that cannot domestically produce the needed medicines in sufficient quantities. . . ." This paper seeks to examine the structure and objectives of TRIPS in relation to pharma development and pricing, to analyze the practical effects of the agreement on the international pharma market, and to assess the likelihood that the amended TRIPS will ameliorate any shortcomings in the achievement of its fundamental objectives.
Speaker Bio
SEC enforcer, bank regulator, economic sanctions architect, Michael P. Malloy has been a law professor for more than 35 years. He has authored or edited more than 190 books and book-length supplements in such fields as banking and securities regulation, contracts, economic sanctions, international banking, philosophy, and public international law. An internationally recognized expert on bank regulation and on economic sanctions, Dr. Malloy received his JD from the University of Pennsylvania and his PhD from Georgetown University. He is a frequent consultant to state, federal, and foreign governments, and international bodies. Dr. Malloy is a U.S. representative to the Real Estate Market Advisory Group, which serves the Committee on Housing and Land Management of the UN Economic Commission for Europe, based in Geneva. He is also Director of the Business and Law Research Division of the Athens Institute for Education and Research, among other activities.