Forced Drug patent licensing in India

An article in the New York Times (March 18,2012) describes a decision by the Indian government to make Bayer compulsorily share its patent for a kidney cancer drug with the Indian firm, Natco Pharma, in return for 6% royalty. Bayer’s defense was that another Indian firm, Ciple, alady made a generic version – but Bayer was simultaneously suing Cipla.  Should the argument by the indian government to require consideration of consumer willingness go pay, rather than cost recovery by the inventor, appropriate ? Could compulsory licensing while accepting patent laws, an appropriate soverign choice, disrupt the global supply chain pricing for pharma companies ?

Advertisements

About aviyer2010

Professor
This entry was posted in Global Contexts, Operations Management, Supply Chain Issues and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s