Viagra reloaded
En mi opinión, el artículo aclara las razones por las que la SIPO anulo la patente de Pfizer sobre el uso del sildenafil para tratar la impotencia.
Viagra did not start out as Viagra. Under its chemical name sildenafil, Pfizer first tested - and patented - it as a heart medication. During testing, however, it was serendipitously observed that, while it didn't help heart patients, impotent men achieved erections again.
So Pfizer tried to patent this secondary use in the United States, where it was granted.
There are two lessons from this. One is that a patent means simply that an invention or idea is, above all, novel. The second is that while patents typically protect a product from being duplicated in either its composition, design or manufacture, it is also possible in some countries to get a patent that protects a particular 'first use'. These are called 'method-of-use' patents.
The US tends to allow such claims, but they are commonly disallowed elsewhere. In November 2000, London's High Court struck down Pfizer's application for a Viagra method-of-use patent, on the ground that it was overly broad. The decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal in January 2002. So Viagra is patented-protected in the US but not in Britain.
The third point then is that even method-of-use patents must be substantively novel - like all other types of patents.
However, Viagra method-of-use was not novel or non-obvious, having been anticipated already in 1993 in an article in the Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society.
Whatever the rationale, China's action in rescinding the patent is permissible under international rules because - and here's the fourth point - WTO regulations leave member countries considerable discretion to decide on intellectual property issues, including whether to even recognise method-of-use patents at all.
Viagra did not start out as Viagra. Under its chemical name sildenafil, Pfizer first tested - and patented - it as a heart medication. During testing, however, it was serendipitously observed that, while it didn't help heart patients, impotent men achieved erections again.
So Pfizer tried to patent this secondary use in the United States, where it was granted.
There are two lessons from this. One is that a patent means simply that an invention or idea is, above all, novel. The second is that while patents typically protect a product from being duplicated in either its composition, design or manufacture, it is also possible in some countries to get a patent that protects a particular 'first use'. These are called 'method-of-use' patents.
The US tends to allow such claims, but they are commonly disallowed elsewhere. In November 2000, London's High Court struck down Pfizer's application for a Viagra method-of-use patent, on the ground that it was overly broad. The decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal in January 2002. So Viagra is patented-protected in the US but not in Britain.
The third point then is that even method-of-use patents must be substantively novel - like all other types of patents.
However, Viagra method-of-use was not novel or non-obvious, having been anticipated already in 1993 in an article in the Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society.
Whatever the rationale, China's action in rescinding the patent is permissible under international rules because - and here's the fourth point - WTO regulations leave member countries considerable discretion to decide on intellectual property issues, including whether to even recognise method-of-use patents at all.
0 Comments:
Publicar un comentario
<< Home