This is a proposal that is: – convenient for producers

This is a proposal that is: convenient for producers

Another justification for the TRIPS PLUS ULTRA system is that it would be more efficient, from the producer´s perspective, to extract the reward from the developed world than from the developing world; a market with better off consumers will have more people willing to pay the monopolistic price for the patented product: here you will find an analysis.

The TRIPS PLUS ULTRA proposal would at the very least be the same for those who innovate and thus profit from the system, taking into account the status quo. Under this proposal, the revenue that innovators lose in developing countries (the period of exclusivity would be shortened in those countries), could be compensated by longer periods in the developed world; if a suitable mechanism of compensation could be designed, it would be neutral compared to the status quo. See here for a chart that attempts to model this. No mechanism would be perfect. The one that is put forward is only the first to be elaborated (it is an early-stage proposal, so much more work is needed). It serves as a first reference of how TRIPS PLUS ULTRA could look for each country.

What this means for innovators will vary from industry to industry. Big Pharma, to give pharmaceutical innovators a name, are at the center of this analysis. Other innovative industries are also very relevant, although they are not necessarily so dependent on patents to innovate. Here you will find a conceptual map that sets out the current level of harmonization (under TRIPS), and in which we show, in an industry-specific way, how TRIPS PLUS ULTRA would better protect and promote innovation.

The early-stage model of what TRIPS PLUS ULTRA would look like does not seek to unequivocally establish the equilibrium or the optimal period of protection granted by patents. It is just a first approach to how a more equitable reward could look. Proportionality, as defined within the TRIPS PLUS ULTRA proposal, could make it easier to obtain objective universal economic conclusions and consensus, since the patent monopoly would be shouldered proportionally by the different countries of the world. This could entail more cooperation and proper compliance with the international standard.

Remember, this proposal is also: