[Pharm-policy] Jim Keon on Canada/EU/WTO dispute and Article 27.1

[James Love]

-------------------
Subject: RE: [Ip-health] One more thing on Canada WTO case
   Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 10:52:24 -0500
   From: Jim Keon <keonj@cdma-acfpp.org>
 Organization: Canadian Drug Manufacturers Association
        To: "'James Love'" <love@cptech.org>

The Canadian patent exception for early working applies to any sector where 
regulatory approval is required prior to marketing.  Thus, it can cover the 
use of patents to develop competing products in sectors such as medical 
devices or agricultural chemicals in addition to pharmaceuticals.


Because of this, the EU contention that the Canadian early working 
provisions are discriminatory shows a lack of understanding of Canadian 
law.  This means that we are unlikely to know from the Panel's decision in 
the Canada-EU case whether or not an early working provision just for 
pharmaceuticals would be a violation of Article 27 of TRIPs.

-----Original Message-----
From:   James Love [SMTP:love@cptech.org]
Sent:   Tuesday, January 25, 2000 11:13 AM
To:     ip-health@venice.essential.org
Subject:        [Ip-health] One more thing on Canada WTO case

Another issue in the Canada case is the EU contention that the Canada
Bolar exception violates the TRIPS Article 27.1 antidiscrimination rules
for patents.  If Canada is permitted to provide early working for
pharmacueticals, then the WTO seems to be rendering a decision that
Article 27.1 requires that while all fields of technology be covered by
patents, countries can adopt differential rules to for fields of
technology, to address social objectives, so long as those differences
are consistent with the TRIPS.  This, of course, is just my guess, and I
would appreciate comments on this important issue.

I  haven't seen the EU pleading in this case.  We have seen a few
documents from the Canada side, such as the items they put on the web.
(Why doesn the EU put its briefs on the web, so its own citiznes can
find out what their foreign policy is?)

   Jamie


-------------------
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
P.O. Box 19367        | http://www.cptech.org
Washington, DC 20036  | love@cptech.org
Voice 202/387-8030    | Fax 202/234-5176


-- 
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
P.O. Box 19367        | http://www.cptech.org
Washington, DC 20036  | mailto:love@cptech.org
Voice 1.202.387.8030  | fax 1.202.387.8030