Pharmaceutical intellectual property laws need reform

Canada's pharmaceutical intellectual property laws need major reform to encourage and protect innovation in developing new drugs, states an analysis in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal).

The supports drug innovation in several ways, including funding of basic research, and tax breaks for companies that conduct drug R&D in Canada. Patents, however, are the most significant and valuable form of support. Patents provide developers of new pharmaceuticals with exclusive rights to market drugs without competition from generic manufacturers. However, there are problems with the current approach.

"We argue that the system is broken," writes Dr. Paul Grootendorst, Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, with coauthors. "The adjudication of patent validity (and hence the period of market exclusivity) is determined by extraordinarily costly and time-consuming litigation between generic and brand (i.e., innovator) drug companies."

They state the reasons for the dysfunction stem from complex rules and regulations that lead to legal ambiguity. The regulations also provide brand name and generic companies with the tools needed to contest the period of market exclusivity; brand firms use the regulations to delay generic entry while generic firms attempt to do the opposite. The outcome of this contest is an extraordinary amount of litigation between brand name and generic companies that has strained the federal courts and resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars in legal fees, costs that are passed on to drug plans and consumers.

The authors suggest that reform of the legal and regulatory framework for market exclusivity is needed. This could include replacing current regulations with a standard guaranteed fixed period for (perhaps 10 years); this would reduce litigation and improve investment certainty to brand firms. A second option would be to abolish the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) regulations, which govern the introduction of generic versions of brand drugs still under patent, and to rely instead on the Patent Act.

"Other countries are facing the same challenges as Canada; none, however, have attempted fundamental reform of its laws on pharmaceutical intellectual property," conclude the authors. "It is time for to show leadership."


Explore further

No difference in brand name and generic drugs regarding thyroid dysfunction

Citation: Pharmaceutical intellectual property laws need reform (2011, November 7) retrieved 16 October 2019 from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-11-pharmaceutical-intellectual-property-laws-reform.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Nov 07, 2011
As we are heading towards more openness and sharing, those authors argue that we should get more enclosure in the name of pharmaceutical profits. I can only shake my head in disbelief.

Nov 07, 2011
As we are heading towards more openness and sharing, those authors argue that we should get more enclosure in the name of pharmaceutical profits. I can only shake my head in disbelief.


To the contrary, they are proposing streamlining the process in Canada in order to eliminate wasteful litigation.

This represents such a clearly logical thought process that it likely has no chance of ever passing.

The pharmas would rather wield their legal divisions like rapiers and I suspect their "approved" politicians will vote along the lines they favor.

Nov 07, 2011
Surely end consumers of pharmaceuticals should be given spectrometric assurance and access at hand rather than expect diversion market's "unknown" derivatives to offload licensing costs on products.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more