The case is about evergreening and in a way, about proving that an
innovation is useful enough for patent protection or extension. This I
think is fair and Novartis got what they deserved. Their posturing is
pointless, because India also does compulsory licensing, meaning if
Novartis says we won't
There's a long (paid column inches I am sure) rant in almost all Indian
newspapers today by the chief of Novartis lamenting the death of
innovation. I couldn't be bothered to read it.
The front page headlines that weren't paid for ran with the conventional
wisdom that the ruling was good for the p
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/01/novartis-denied-cancer-drug-patent-india
Novartis denied cancer drug patent in landmark Indian case
Supreme court ruling paves way for generic companies to make cheap copies of
Glivec in the developing world
Sarah Boseley, health editor
The Guardian,
