Brazil Breaks Patent to Make AIDS Drug 1041
Andy Tai writes: "In this CNN story, Brazil decides to break a patent over an AIDS drug for public benefits. Brazil will produce the drug domestically without agreements with patent holder, the Swiss pharmaceutical company Roche. Brazil's efforts to fight AIDS have been praised internationally, and it successfully prevented the US Government from bringing complaints in the WTO on behalf of the drugs industry. This may set an important example that public needs justify the disregard of patent protection." There's another article in the Boston Globe about the decision.
from the life-before-dollars dept (Score:2, Informative)
Brazil has also set many other precedents, including one that US (and the rest of the world) has to yet catch on with - clean emission alcohol powered cars [consumerenergycenter.com]. Unfortunately, because of who we have at 1600 Pennsylvania, I don't expect many of these to be around until after he leaves office.
Link to PDF about what this drug is/does (Score:3, Informative)
Its pretty complex, but tell me why Brazil or anyone else should have to pay at least something for developing this, let alone testing it?
Re:how about the need to protects patents?? (Score:2, Informative)
I'll bite.
i'm sorry, but brazil is clearly in the wrong here.
Not clear at all
What happened to the drug companies' rights?
Rights created and conferred by elected governments. The elected Brazilian government justifiably thinks that the tradeoff between corporate and people's rights is different in their country.
If they don't receive royalties on their drugs, how are they going to support ongoing research??
Drug companies do not have a right to the public's money to subsidise extraordinarily inefficient research programs. Most drug company income lines the pockets of executives and shareholders anyway.
What is Brazil doing to cure AIDS??
Probably alot more than most drug companies. The large drug companies have a consistent record of ignoring the third world because there's no monopoly profits to be made.
It looks like they just want to get something for nothing to me.
I'd say it's the companies who want something for nothing.
It's unreasonable that an intellectual property creator should not be paid for their work. It is equally unreasonable, and for the same reasons, that an intellectual property creator should be paid an indefinitely large number of times for the one intellectual property.
Re:This is not a good trend to cheer. (Score:2, Informative)
For a while, Canada has been fighting Brazil over subsidies in their aviation industry. From what I understand, the government gives big subsidies and extremely low or no interest loans to buyers of Brazilian aircraft.
Canada brought them to the WTO and won (it was hurting Bombardier, which BTW the government controls part of because it saved it's ass many years ago). Regardless, the Brazilans have refused to comply or fully comply and there's been a little on again, off again trade war (a while ago it's with beef).
All this seems so childish but, when it comes to doing AIDs drugs, the people they are really hurting are those in the western countries who will probably end up paying more to offset any type of loss.
On a related note, India is doing the same thing with AIDs drugs: ignoring International IP to make cheap versions. The difference was the Indian government & pharmaceuticals planned on selling them mostly in Africa (sorry, I don't have a link to the story).
Re:Example? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Way to fucking GO!! (Score:2, Informative)
A company that cured AIDS tomorrow and started charging $10,000 per cure would do more to save lives than all the research that preceeded it, and more than all the loud-mouthed technocrats could do.
I am reminded of Florida's last major hurricane, where people in northern FL, Georgia, whatever, would load up trucks of ice bags and go into the devastated areas and sell them for $10.00 per bag.
"Why, how horrible!" So it was outlawed.
And soon, no one was getting any ice at all for love or money.
Thanks, government, for the "help".
2 Billion R&D == 5 Billion profit (Score:5, Informative)
[roche.com]
http://www.roche.com/home/investor/inv-finance/
They are pulling in cash hand over fist. Now, why couldn't they negotiate a lower price w/ Brazil so that wouldn't send half their budget to Roche?
You People Are Missing The Point! (Score:2, Informative)
I've been reading the arguments back and forth about this issue. Some people think that lives are sacred and hence breaking the (IP) law is OK. Others say that the ends does not justify the means and other arguments.
Well *forget* the morality of the issue and look at it from a practical viewpoint. If countries are going to break international law to distribute medicine, then what reason will drug companies have to find cures or even treatments to these diseases? None. As it is, a cure is completely unprofitable to large drug companies because Brazil and other 3rd world countries who can't develop or afford it themselves would simply "pirate" it. But they will suffer come the next great epidemic. The drug companies will ignore the big diseases because they are not profitable, instead they will stick to the profit centers of headache/pain relief and fat reducing drugs. IOW drugs that don't save lives but only make you feel better *without actually helping anyone*.
Re:Companies dont do discovery research... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Drug Companies Rarely Design the Drugs They Sel (Score:1, Informative)
THAT IS FALSE.
Go search on google.com for the history behind the drugs. All the current protease inhibitors we're invented at companies. Not by the govt.
This may not be true for AZT, the compound which was found (as an anti-cancer therapy that turned out to have too many side effects) under a govt. grant back in the 60's before AIDS was known. BUT, it was a private corporation Burroughs Wellcome that first found that the AZT compound was effective against AIDS.
Just go look up the patent on a drug (type in its real name) on
http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html
It will show who the original INVENTORS are by name and where they worked (Assignee refers to the ORIGINAL not current). Here are some to try out.
Zidovudine (AZT/ZDV)
Stavudine (d4T)
Didanosine (ddI)
Inclinavir (crixivan)
Zalcitabine (ddC)
Ritonavir (Norvir)
Lamivudine (3TC/Epivir)
Nelfinavir (viracept)
Saquinavir (Invirase)
Nevirapine (Viramune)
Re:This is not a good trend to cheer. (Score:2, Informative)
The Brazilian government gives all AIDS medication for free to anyone needing it.
Here you go... (Score:3, Informative)
Marketing and distribution 8,746 (2000) 7,813 (1999)
Research and development 3,950 (2000) 3,782 (1999)
Numbers are in millions of Swiss francs.
Clear enough?
Re:This is an excellent thing to cheer (Score:3, Informative)
Huh ? Monopolies ARE possible without government intervention. They certainly do NOT require government intervention - though this is often needed to BREAK monopolies.