Unfortunately India have a unique attitude to patents, I've C&P'd the relevant text in this interview, ambiguous about BTA royalty.
Multinational Monitor:The Tamiflu Manufacturing Controversy MAR/APR 2006
Dr. Yusuf Hamied is the chair of Cipla, the Indian generic drug manufacturer
Hamied: We are definitely going to produce, and are producing already, zanamavir as an alternative. That is the inhaled product of Biota in Australia, which was licensed to GlaxoSmithKline.
MM: They are not complaining about your production?
Hamied: They cannot, because the product was patented in 1993. The patent for that does not count in India.
MM: Is it correct that GlaxoSmithKline said that even where they claim a patent, they will not try to enforce it?
Hamied: I have no idea.
It is not their patent. It is a patent of Biota in Australia. Glaxo pays them a royalty.
Like oseltamivir is not a patent of Roche, it is a patent of Gilead. Roche is paying Gilead a royalty, and I am also prepared to pay a royalty on valid patents, so what is the big deal?
http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/mm2006/032006/interview-hamied.html
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- BTA
- glaxosmithkline update: influenza a (h1n1)
glaxosmithkline update: influenza a (h1n1), page-5
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 6 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)