Industry committee  If I could add to that, there is a general provision in the TRIPS article that allows for compulsory licensing in the domestic setting. It stipulates that when you allow an authorization or when you allow for compulsory licensing, you must have a feature so you can review it. Yo

Industry committee  No, but it's in article 31 of the TRIPS agreement itself. Anybody who chooses to adopt legislation implementing a waiver still is responsible for meeting its obligations under the remaining articles or paragraphs of article 31 and TRIPS, which control the use of compulsory licens

Industry committee  Yes, that's right.

Industry committee  If there is no section 21.09 then section 21.12 doesn't arise. If you don't have an initial term, you would not have a renewed term.

Industry committee  As I recall the proceedings from last Thursday, the proposal was that the sponsors of the bill would be prepared to drop clauses 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 16, and 17. Clause 6 proposes to repeal section 21.06 of the Patent Act, the website disclosure, and in its place it proposes a m

Industry committee  I think that's a fair comment. The non-commercial character of the scheme was something that was set out in what is referred to as the chairman's statement, and that, by definition of the General Council decision in the Patent Act, was incorporated into the Canadian legislation b

Industry committee  There are a number of elements in Bill C-393. As I think I said last Thursday, this is very intricate: A goes to B to go to C, etc., so you have to follow the thread through the fabric, so to speak. But yes, I think that's a fair comment. Some of the anti-abuse provisions that

Industry committee  Starting at the top, concerning schedule 1, the comment is correct: there is no WTO requirement of which I am aware that says you have to put drugs on a list. They just were happy with a definition of—

Industry committee  Yes, the country list; I wanted to start at the top. The rationale for the country list, as I tried to explain earlier, was to recognize the different categories of eligible importer that the WTO negotiators had identified. For instance, the least developed countries are eligible

Industry committee  I'd just like to add to that briefly. In the waiver decision, the WTO negotiators set up different classes of what they called “eligible importer” and that's what the current schedules 2 to 4 do. So when you get rid of those, there is no distinction between eligibility that would

Industry committee  I can't speak to the WTO negotiations because that was a very long multi-year process, but certainly when the WTO member states were trying to find a way to make compulsory licensing work in jurisdictions that had no pharmaceutical manufacturing capacity, there were a number of t

Industry committee  The approval of a product for export under the Patent Act is done as the approval for drugs is domestically. That's not what we're talking about. We're talking about amending the schedules to add a drug to them. That's not necessarily a health approval, although it would be imp

Industry committee  Thank you, Chairman. It's hard to know where to begin. As you have noted, this is very complex and very interrelated, and that's the way legislation is usually crafted, so that when it's presented in the House the interconnections between (a) and (b) and (c), etc., are clear.

Industry committee  It's all very complex and interrelated, but essentially, the original CAMR legislation, Bill C-9, made reference to things like the WTO waiver decision. To do that, a number of the definitions were technical; WTO is used, so there's a definition of WTO to tell you what the World

Industry committee  Some of them are just there for drafting convenience, but others do have an impact. For instance, where in Bill C-9 you see references to “in accordance with the General Council Decision”, that has substance to it. The circumstance of a manufacture and exportation and importation