s*******h
发帖数: 3219 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Military 讨论区 】
发信人: sammamish (sammamish), 信区: Military
标 题: 公司的小印对我说，美国今天制药业是被印度打败的
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sun Oct 13 17:49:38 2013, 美东)
还神秘的说印度制药是世界第一，中国想追印度一直追不上。有这事吗，男护士说说? | m*******i
发帖数: 8711 | 2 印度的generic drug还是很不错的。比不上美国，比中国药业要高一节 | m*******i
发帖数: 8711 | | z***m
发帖数: 1602 | 4 就是直接法律规定美国的专利在印度不起作用，然后山寨之，卖低价。说起山寨，中国
说第二，谁敢说第一？ | l*****n
发帖数: 1679 | 5 印度药厂还有一个优势就是，随便做人体试验，道德风险很低
【在 z***m 的大作中提到】
: 就是直接法律规定美国的专利在印度不起作用，然后山寨之，卖低价。说起山寨，中国
: 说第二，谁敢说第一？
| B******1
发帖数: 9094 | 6 India did not have patent protection for drugs until 2005 when India joined
WTO. At that time India was required to have patent protection for medicines
or pharmaceutical products according to the TRIPs standard. Between 1970
and 2005, India's generic drug industry thrived and became the world's No.1.
It is also the first developing country which filed ANDA in U.S. and
dragged down the market price of generic drugs in the U.S.
Although India's patent law allows new application in pharmaceuticals, it
entails that 1) the new drug entity to be discovered in or after 1995; 2)
stringent inventive step which does not allow "evergreening," 3) compulsory
licensing if the government thinks the imported drug's price is too high.
Overall, it protects its generic drug industry very well and makes
healthcare affordable to its poverty-stricken population. Some Japanese and
American companies have started investing in Indian generic drug industry to
gain inroads against their domestic rivals since India patent law requires
local manufacturing for certain drugs.
Finally, India provides almost all the cheap drugs to African countries
which need a lot of HIV medications.
In this aspect, Chinese pharmaceutical industry still has some catching-up
to do and it would be an uphill battle to replace India.
As to the pro's and con's of the Indian generic industry, it really depends
on whether you are a patient or a Western pharmaceutical company. Here is an
example: In 2003, the Swiss drug maker Novartis forced Indian competitors
to stop making generic versions of its leukemia drug Glivec, which the
Indian companies sold for $2,700 a year. Novartis then priced its version at
$27,000 a year, while giving free treatment to a few poor patients. But
earlier this year, this patent was invalidated by the Indian Supreme Court,
based on the facts that 1) the original entity of Glivec was discovered in
1993, thus, not qualified for patent protection in India; 2) its ensuing
patent was an evergreening patent with a new salt form of Glivec without
significant improvement in efficacy (but with 30% increase in OBAV.) Who is
the winner or loser in this case? You decide. | c*********l
发帖数: 3438 | 7 美国为什么不说印度知识产权问题，总拿中国说事？
joined
medicines
1.
compulsory
【在 B******1 的大作中提到】
: India did not have patent protection for drugs until 2005 when India joined
: WTO. At that time India was required to have patent protection for medicines
: or pharmaceutical products according to the TRIPs standard. Between 1970
: and 2005, India's generic drug industry thrived and became the world's No.1.
: It is also the first developing country which filed ANDA in U.S. and
: dragged down the market price of generic drugs in the U.S.
: Although India's patent law allows new application in pharmaceuticals, it
: entails that 1) the new drug entity to be discovered in or after 1995; 2)
: stringent inventive step which does not allow "evergreening," 3) compulsory
: licensing if the government thinks the imported drug's price is too high.
| B******1
发帖数: 9094 | 8 One is patent right, the other is copyright. For the record, India is always
a target for patent right dispute from the U.S. perspective. If in doubt,
check the U.S. Annual Special 301 Report on trade agreements with other
nations.
【在 c*********l 的大作中提到】
: 美国为什么不说印度知识产权问题，总拿中国说事？
:
: joined
: medicines
: 1.
: compulsory
| h***9
发帖数: 532 | | B******1
发帖数: 9094 | 10 In addition to illegal copies of CD, DVD of movies, China also has a bad
reputation of stealing trade-secrets from western companies, especially in
the chemical and pharmaceutical sectors.
Under U.S. law, trade secrets includes commercially valuable information not
generally known to or readily ascertainable by the public. The secret
formula for Coke is the most famous example in this regard. Other examples
include confidential formulas, manufacturing techniques, and customer lists.
Beyond purely economic losses, the lost industrial secrets may cost
millions of jobs, discourage future investment in R&D, and stifle future
innovations.
It is reported that about 50-80% of the stealing was by Chinese citizens and
their proxies. Russia and India are the other notables in this category.
This concern partially explains why the U.S. frowns on commercial takeover
of an American enterprise by a Chinese company and often boycotts the deal.
DuPont (TiO2 production technology), Dow Chemical (manufacture of
chlorinated polyethylene or CPE), Valspar (160 secret formulas for paints,
coatings and other proprietary information), Citadel Group (Chicago hedge
fund's electronic trading system), General Motors (hybrid technology ),
Motorola (descriptions of a walkie-talkie type feature on Motorola
cellphones), and Eli Lilly (this month's news!) are among those American
companies who have caught IP thieves, many of whom are Chinese or Chinese
Americans. New York University's medical center reported the theft of its
NIH-funded research project by three Chinese researchers
earlier this year. |
|
