ESSENTIAL ACTION PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT
OF FTAA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROPOSALS'
EFFECT ON ACCESS TO MEDICINES
July 3, 2001
For Immediate Release,
Contact: Robert Weissman,
202-387-8030
The just-released draft of the FTAA chapter on intellectual property
rights is primarily in brackets, meaning that terms have not been agreed
on. This makes it impossible to say precisely what is "in" the FTAA,
because a single provision may be followed by an alternative that directly
contravenes it. [The text is at < http://www.ftaa-alca.org/alca_e.asp>.]
What can be said is this: There are numerous proposed provisions in the
FTAA that would go far beyond WTO rules and would dramatically limit
countries' ability to promote access to medicines. Lives are at stake in
the negotiations that determine whether these provisions are incorporated
into the final agreement, and in the national deliberations over whether a
final agreement is adopted. To take one example, under these harmful
provisions, Brazil, which runs what may be the developing world's most
effective HIV/AIDS treatment program, may find itself facing difficulties
in making new drugs available.
The text does not indicate which country or countries proposed or support
specific provisions. But it is a safe bet that the United States is
backing many of the worst proposals, which also appear in the U.S. summary
FTAA proposals. These proposals were released several months ago, and are
on the USTR web page www.ustr.org.
Among the worst proposals are the following:
- A limitation on compulsory licensing to the public sector (see page 8.64
(6)). Under this proposal, compulsory licenses could only be issued to a
government, or private parties selling exclusively to the government. This
would prevent, for example, Costa Rica from issuing a compulsory license
on HIV/AIDS drugs to an Indian generic manufacturer, for sale in the
private sector.
- An extension of patent terms to compensate for delays in granting the
patent (see page 8.65 (8)). This provision would extend monopoly
protections for drug manufacturers and permit further gouging of
consumers. WTO rules already obligate countries to grant 20-year patents,
a period reached taking into account potential delays in the granting of
patents. Adding additional time to the patent term is simply a gift to
brand-name drug companies and other patent holders, at the expense of
consumers.
- New protections for marketing approval ("registration") data (see page
8.65 (1)). The FTAA proposal would require five years protection for the
data submitted to show drugs are safe and efficacious. (WTO rules are
vague on registration data, requiring protection of the data against
unfair commercial use but imposing no clear mandates.) To gain marketing
approval, generic companies typically show that their product is
bioequivalent to a patented product (that is, that the generic is
chemically similar and works the same in the human body) and then rely on
the patented productÕs safety data to earn approval. In many instances, if
a generic company cannot use the already-generated registration data, it
will not introduce a generic version of the patented product; and if it
regenerates the data, consumers suffer from delay of introduction of the
generic version. Registration data protections are important for new drugs
that are not patent-protected or in cases of compulsory licensing. If a
compulsory license is granted for a drug for which registration data
exclusivities remain in force, the data exclusivity can block the generic
from gaining marketing approval.
We will have a fuller analysis of the effect of the intellectual property
provisions of the draft FTAA on access to medicines -- as well as an
assessment of how the investment proposals might impact access to
medicines -- as soon as possible.
CPT Home
IP and Healthcare
CPT page on Regional Trade Agreements