One of the issues in patent waivers on vaccines is that it appears that the drug companies are claiming that even with a patent waiver, other companies lack the trade secrets to make the vaccines.
Here is the proverbial money quote:
The issue of trade secrets continues to be the sticking point preventing a consensus. Proponents of including trade secrets within the scope of any IP waiver argue that it will not be possible to replicate some of the vaccines on the basis of the information disclosed in the patents alone.
This appears to be a declaration that the patents are invalid, because one of the reasons that companies get patents is because they are supposed to provide sufficient information for, "A notional person skilled in the art to carry out that claimed invention."
It's part of the deal to get an exclusive license to the idea for the invention: if you want the subsidy of exclusivity, you must reveal your invention to the world.
The technical term is Sufficiency of Disclosure, and failure to do so means that the patent is invalid and unenforceable.
Why were they granted these patents in the first place if their applications were incomplete?
0 comments :
Post a Comment