Section 3(d) for precluding patent evergreening: India's attempts to improve access to medicines
In the year 2013, India created a stir in the world of pharmaceutical patents by rejecting patent application of Novartis' anticancer drug, Glivec1. This rejection was based on section 3(d) of the Indian patent act2 which precludes evergreening of pharmaceutical patents yet claims to promote...
| Published in: | Интеллектуальные права: вызовы 21-го века : материалы Международной конференции (14-16 ноября 2019 г.) С. 133-139 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Book Chapter |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://vital.lib.tsu.ru/vital/access/manager/Repository/vtls:000669793 Перейти в каталог НБ ТГУ |
| Summary: | In the year 2013, India created a stir in the world of pharmaceutical patents by rejecting patent application of Novartis' anticancer drug, Glivec1. This rejection was based on section 3(d) of the Indian patent act2 which precludes evergreening of pharmaceutical patents yet claims to promote incremental inventions. This report discusses the necessity of a bright line statute like section 3(d) in a country like India, which has become pharmacy of the developed world, and yet needs to promote access to cheap medicines due to low human development index. This necessity has been examined by studying India's unique position between the developing and developed status, infrastructure and human resource at the patent office, training of patent examiners and the awareness about patent litigations in India. The report also compares provisions of precluding patent evergreening by some other countries, with a statute like section 3(d). After giving due |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | Библиогр. в подстроч. примеч. |
| ISBN: | 9785946218559 |