Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
3(D) View Of India’S Patent Law: Social Justice Aspiration Meets Property Rights In Novartis V. Union Of India & Others, 13 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 719 (2014), Saby Ghoshray
UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law
Not many constitutional decisions from developing countries find themselves at the center of global debate like the Indian Supreme Court’s Novartis decision invalidating the Gleevec patent. The patent was invalidated under amended Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act, which was amended to address some of the concerns of imbalance between the maximalist and minimalist cultures in the pharmaceutical context. Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act introduced a new threshold of patent eligibility for pharmaceutical innovation that requires applicants to demonstrate enhanced efficacy of their products. The objective of this Article is to get beyond the reactionary reviews of …
A Scientific Approach To Intellectual Property And Health: Innovation, Access, And A Forgotten Corner Of The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights, 13 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 794 (2014), Adam Houston
UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law
For years, there has been vigorous debate over the relationship between intellectual property and health, especially in the context of pharmaceutical patents. Despite numerous attempts to strike a balance between innovation and access, however, few have looked to Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for guidance. Article 27, and its further elaboration and codification under Article 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, explicitly address this balance by pairing the right of everyone “to share in scientific advancement and its benefits” with a similarly universal right of authors to “material interests resulting” from …