U.S. trade office hits out at Novartis ruling

‘Appears to confirm that India’s law creates a special, additional criterion for select technologies’

May 02, 2013 11:44 pm | Updated December 04, 2021 11:08 pm IST - WASHINGTON:

This week, the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) office issued a strong critique of the ruling by India’s Supreme Court in the Novartis case, denying the pharmaceutical giant a patent on cancer drug Glivec.

In its 2013 Special 301 Report, the USTR said Washington was “concerned that the recent decision by India’s Supreme Court with respect to India’s prohibition on patents for certain chemical forms absent a showing of ‘enhanced efficacy’ may have the effect of limiting the patentability of potentially beneficial innovations.”

The report further said that the decision by the highest court in the land “appears to confirm that India’s law creates a special, additional criterion for select technologies, like pharmaceuticals, which could preclude issuance of a patent even if the applicant demonstrates that the invention is new, involves an inventive step, and is capable of industrial application.”

While the USTR announced its decision to retain India on its “Priority Watch List” for the present year, it noted that in 2012, “India made limited progress in improving its weak Intellectual Property Regime legal framework and enforcement system.”

However, in contrast to the U.S. view, reports quoted WTO Director Pascal Lamy saying earlier that “Recent decisions by the courts in India have led to a lot of protest by pharmaceutical companies. But decisions made by an independent judiciary have to be respected as such.”

The USTR also lashed out at decisions made by the Indian Intellectual Property Appellate Board and criticised India’s copyright protection regime.

Regarding the latter the report said that while the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2012 provided limited improvements to India’s copyright regime, it also raised “a number of questions regarding the scope of exclusive rights under Indian law and the ability of rights holders to properly exercise those rights.”

Additional legislative changes were needed to ensure that content-based industries could effectively combat physical and online piracy and develop new models for the delivery of content, the USTR report said.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.