How quickly IP law changes in China... In May, Pfizer announced that it had joined forces with the Chinese government to enforce its 2001 Viagra patent. Pfizer planned to start training and testing in December, but it seems this plan is not to be.
In what appears to be the first pharmaceutical patent revocation, China has revoked the patent. Not long after the patent was granted, pharmaceutical producers (12 in this account)
requested re-examination. It isn't quite clear yet exactly what happened at that re-examination. Some claim the patent failed the detailed description required by Article 26 of China's patent code. Others claim it failed the novelty requirement. Pfizer claims its patent
still stands pending appeal. The Viagra patent was already poorly enforced, and now the prognosis looks even more bleak for Pfizer.
This situation has now changed from widespread government-ignored piracy to possibly more widespread government-sanctioned piracy. In the discussion of enforcing international IP rights, it seems to me that pharmaceutical patents are possibly the most important (with many exceptions of course, generally inapplicable to Viagra). Pharma patents are at least intended to encourage expensive R&D to enable innovation, which we have certainly seen in many drugs, even those not as headline grabbing as Viagra, in recent years.
Instead of simply not enforcing these intellectual property rights, the Viagra patent, China has come forward with a statement disrespecting these rights. In a sense, this decision is good; China has honestly declared its defiance. It is no longer protecting Viagra, a drug which lacks the humanitarian appeal of, say, AIDS drugs. China has refused to grant the property rights in Viagra others have. Now it is time to discuss exactly international pharmaceutical patents are intended to do, what they are actually doing, and why Pfizer should or shouldn't deserve patents for Viagra and other drugs also. So what do you plan to do, Pfizer?, EC?, WIPO?
Update(7/14): Pfizer is confident it will win back its patent on appeal.