Needs to respect IP rights

Needs to respect IP rights
x
Highlights

India is not demonstrating itself as a true signatory to the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights agreement -Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw ...

India is not demonstrating itself as a true signatory to the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights agreement -Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw businessNew Delhi (PTI): Raking up the intellectual property rights (IPRs) issue, the Biocon's CMD Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw has pointed out that India needs to show to the world that it respects IPRs, if global pharmaceutical firms to invest in India. "We must understand that intellectual property (IP) is important for India to embrace and respect and protect. If you cannot demonstrate that IP is safe in the country, I think you are not sending the right message, you are not going to find people investing in India," she said. While reacting to a question on whether infringement of patents was taking place in India, she points out that India is not demonstrating itself as a true signatory to the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement. "If India truly sees itself as a global leader then you'll have to lead by example, you have to make sure that whatever you do in the realm of IP is justifiable, is responsible and does not amount to abuse and theft, that is what is happening today," Shaw said forcefully without referring to the recent developments in the IPR space. She suggested that India should be judicious while granting compulsory licenses (CL) for patented drugs to domestic drug makers and it should be during an emergency, pandemic or under acute drug shortage and "not on the basis of affordability". Incidentally, various, multi-national firms, including Pfizer, have alleged rising cases of patent infringement in India. Last year, the India Patents Office had invoked the provision of compulsory license (CL) permitting Hyderabad-based Natco Pharma to manufacture and sell cancer- treatment drug Nexavar at a price, over 30 times lower than that charged by its patent-holder Bayer Corporation.
Show Full Article
Print Article
Next Story
More Stories
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENTS