Much has been written about the BRIC countries since the Goldman Sachs paper, Dreaming with the BRICs, projecting BRIC’s collective passage of the G6 in economic power by 2050.

However, intellectual property circles are only the most recent flashpoint for decades-long tension between developed and developing countries that has lasted through (and been an important root factor in) oil shocks, petrodollar debt crises, and endless United Nations and WTO discussions.

The life science industry could generally be caught up in this big picture. Given the struggle, how can the industry conclude that partner nations are serious about their intellectual property regime?

The First Sign: TRIPS

Any nation that ascends into membership in the WTO takes on the TRIPS Agreement at the same time. There were 148 member nations as of February 2005.

In accordance, nations such as India are passing laws to modify their internal IP systems to meet the criteria of the TRIPS Agreement. India’s Patents Amendment Act of 2005 can be reviewed through the Office of the Controller General of Patents in India.

BRIC Country Perspectives:

• Brazil’s WTO Membership Profile


• Russia’s WTO Observer Profile


• India’s WTO Membership Profile


• China’s WTO Membership Profile

The Second Sign: Committing Resources to National Patent Offices

At TiECon 2005, a “healthcare luminaries” panel covered familiar ground: India’s need to expand its Patent Office staffing to adequately review applications. The subject is not new. For years, experts have pointed to this window of time during which new workers would be required to avoid a catastrophic backlog in patent applications.

National patent offices in developing countries face a daunting task locating, training and maintaining a stable of skilled examiners as their systems harmonize.

The Third Sign: Enforcement

Enforcement is as great an indicator as all others combined. While countries continue to sign onto and make the alterations to their internal IP systems required by the WTO, a simultaneous movement is on to shift the world’s IP focus.

A recent proposal by the “Friends of Development” (14 developing nations) makes the case for alteration of the World Intellectual Property Organization’s (WIPO) overall structure toward a Development Agenda.

Already, statements on the record (for example, see pp. 40-41, among other references of these WIPO records) in meetings at WIPO and elsewhere paint a new or modified frame around policy developments in countries signed on to TRIPS.

Among other implications, these international discussions reflect a reminder to life science companies: there are multiple agendas at work, and expert advice will often be required to assess appropriate international strategies.

Global Perspectives:

• Africa ICT Policy Monitor: Nations Clash on Future of WIPO Development Agenda


• May 2-3, 2005 Joint Meeting of World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) jointly with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the World Trade Organization (WTO)

The life science industry is increasingly global at earlier stages of company growth. Faced with a world of opportunities, these issues serve to remind those in business development, international operations and management that advice should be sought in establishing market entry and partnership strategies. Between all of these opportunities and the many parties engaged in multilateral, system-wide negotiation, there are risks to be assessed and understood in order to be successful.