Intellectual Property Rights For Global Health

Republican congressional leaders are eager to give President Obama Trade Promotion Authority, or "Fast Track." Proponents argue that Fast Track will break the logjam holding up important international trade agreements like the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), which includes countries as diverse as Australia, Canada, Peru and Vietnam.

Fast Track would allow the president to finalize the agreement before sending it to Congress for a straightforward up-or-down vote within a limited time. However, the likelihood of Fast Track resulting in TPP getting a "thumbs up" from Congress is limited by potential differences between the president and the congressional majority on intellectual property rights.

In a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) asserted that the administration must pursue a number of negotiating objectives, including "beefing up protections for U.S. intellectual property" if it wants Congress to approve the TPP.

It is uncertain the president is as committed to intellectual property as Mr. Ryan and Mr. Cruz hope, especially with respect to patents for medicines. Although the text of the TPP is not yet available to the public, the U.S. Trade Representative, who negotiates in the president's name, insists that "TPP countries have agreed to reflect in the text a shared commitment to the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health."

The 2001 Doha Declaration was an attempt to limit international trade agreements' commitment to patent rights that were accepted in the World Trade Organization's 1995 Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. It insists that low and middle-income countries should have broad latitude to allow generic drug makers to make copies of patented medicines through a legal mechanism called "compulsory licensing."

The Doha Declaration was an important achievement for well-intentioned advocates for public health, such as Doctors Without Borders (known also by its French acronym MSF), which has just launched an advertising campaign designed to gut patent rights in the TPP. MSF claims – reasonably – that poor countries and nonprofits cannot afford to pay the prices that manufacturers can negotiate with payers in wealthier countries.

Unfortunately, attacking patents is a misguided way to improve access to medicines in low and middle-income. Although it is a counter-intuitive conclusion, strong patent rights are a better way to achieve this goal.

In an international environment of strong patent rights, innovative drug makers would have every incentive to lower prices voluntarily to poor countries. Costs of manufacturing and distribution are a small percentage of prices charged for patented medicines in the United States. The reason the government recognizes patents is so the manufacturer can charge enough to earn a return on investment in research and development.

source: http://www.forbes.com/