Healthy Skepticism Library item: 18209

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: Electronic Source

Silverman E
Biased Agenda? A Law School, India & Drugmakers
Pharmalot 2010 Jun 10
http://www.pharmalot.com/2010/06/biased-agenda-a-law-school-india-drugmakers/

Full text:

Three months ago, a controversy erupted in India where intellectual property conferences sponsored by drugmakers, law firms and others angered various non-profit groups that argued the sessions are little more than gussied up opportunities to lobby India’s judges and policy makers. In their view, these IP summits, which are organized by the George Washington University Law School, are attempts to influence sitting judges on patent law enforcement issues that are pending in Indian courts.
At the time, more than 20 consumer groups and non-governmental organizations wrote to India’s Minister of Commerce and Industry to complain the meetings are used as forums by companies to promote their IP and lobby for amendments to existing law or plead cases before the Indian Patent Office. Now, nine groups wrote GW to complain its India Project purports to be “an academic exercise and free-flow exchange of ideas, but instead act as a front for a biased industry agenda.”
The groups, which include Doctors Without Borders/USA, Oxfam America, Health Gap and Public Citizen, complain the India Project “failed to present a balanced discussion on intellectual property, and especially the importance of protecting public health in developing countries.” They also charge GW has “misrepresented an industry-centered perspective as an independent academic exercise,” since the project accepts funding from drugmakers and software companies, which have “vested interests” (here’s background that mentions Gilead Sciences as an example).
So what do they want?
They hope to convince GW officials to “resist the use of the university by industries interested entirely in commercial profits,” and to present a wider scope of IP issues that reflect a need to protect public health, as well as changing the patent system so more innovative meds for neglected diseases are produced and access to needed meds is widened (here is their letter). We are awaiting a reply from GW and will update you if, and when, the university responds.