Content deleted Content added
SimLibrarian (talk | contribs) rm spam link, rm duplicate links, capitalization consistency |
Skullcinema (talk | contribs) cite patent fix |
||
Line 117:
===Patent issues===
Nutriset holds or held patents in many countries (including {{cite patent|country=US|number=6346284|status=patent}}, published in 2002) for the production of nut-based, nutritional foods as pastes, which they have defended to prevent non-licensees in the United States from producing similar products.<ref name=bbc1/> In places where Nutriset does not hold a patent, manufacturers of similar pastes have been stopped from exporting their products to places where Plumpy'Nut is patented.<ref name=irin>{{cite web | url=http://www.irinnews.org/printreport.aspx?reportid=86979 | title=FOOD: Making peanut butter gets stickier | publisher=UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs | work=IRIN: humanitarian news and analysis | date=11 November 2009 | access-date=8 May 2014}}</ref> In at least 27 African nations, any non-profit (including [[non-governmental organization|NGOs]]) can make the paste and not pay a license fee.<ref name=twentyseven/>
In 2010, two US non-profit organizations unsuccessfully sued the French company in an attempt to legally produce Plumpy'Nut in the US without paying the royalty fee.<ref name=bbc1/> Mike Mellace, president of one of the organizations claimed that "some children are dying because Nutriset prevents other companies from producing a food which could save their lives."<ref>{{cite web|last=Staff |title=Plumpy'Nut goes to court |url=http://www.vita.it/ultimenotizie/plumpy-nut-goes-to-court.html |publisher=vita.it |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140505193540/http://www.vita.it/ultimenotizie/plumpy-nut-goes-to-court.html |archive-date=May 5, 2014 }}</ref> Invalidation of the Nutriset patent may have a positive impact on populations affected by famine, and studies by humanitarian organizations support the idea that having a single, dominant supplier in Nutriset is undesirable.<ref name=sandiego>{{cite web|last=Lavelle|first=Janet|title=Child malnutrition center of legal battle|date=January 16, 2010|url=http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2010/jan/16/child-malnutrition-center-legal-battle/all/?print |publisher= The San Diego Union-Tribune|work=utsandiego.com|access-date=25 May 2016}}</ref> Critics of Nutriset argue the US patent is "obvious in light of prior recipes" and "that the patent has essentially conferred monopoly power on Nutriset and thus violated the [[Sherman Act]]".<ref name=internatllaw/> By definition, a [[patent]] grants a temporary monopoly, and Nutriset won the case. Some have suggested a similarity between pharmaceutical company compulsory licensing agreements, in place under the [[WTO]] [[TRIPS Agreement]], and Plumpy'Nut.<ref name=internatllaw>{{cite web|last=Bakhsh|first=Umar R.|title=The Plumpy'Nut predicament: is compulsory licensing a solution?|url=http://studentorgs.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjip/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2013/06/07_12JIntellProp2382012.pdf|publisher=Chicago Kent Journal of Intellectual Property|access-date=4 May 2014}}</ref>
Line 123:
Following a threat of legal action against a Norwegian company that was exporting a similar product to Kenya, Nutriset was criticized by [[Médecins Sans Frontières]],<ref name=sandiego/> which stated in an open letter that "Nutriset has been asked repeatedly by us and others for simple, reasonable licensing terms... Instead it appears that [Nutriset has] decided to adopt a policy of aggressive protection of [its] patents that could be considered an abuse in relation to humanitarian products."<ref name=MSF>{{cite web|last=von Schoen-Angerer|first=Tido|title=MSF: Nutriset patent impeding access to treatment of Severe Acute Malnutrition|url=http://www.msfaccess.org/sites/default/files/MSF_assets/MalNut/Docs/NUT_letter_NutrisetPatent_ENG_2009.pdf|publisher=Campaign for Access to Essential Medicines|access-date=1 May 2014}}</ref> A UNICEF study, commissioned at Duke University and the University of North Carolina, recommended a diversified supplier base of RUTF products to better serve global needs.<ref>{{cite web|last=Team Praescient|title=UNICEF'S Mission to End Hunger: Leveraging Analytic Methodologies to Advance Development Goals|date=November 2011|url=http://praescientanalytics.com/unicefs-mission-to-end-hunger-leveraging-analytic-methodologies-to-advance-development-goals/|publisher=praescientanalytics.com/|access-date=4 May 2014}}</ref> In response to the criticism, Nutriset has allowed companies and NGOs in some African countries to make the paste and not pay license fees.<ref name=twentyseven>{{Cite web |title=Nutriset/IRD's Patents Usage Agreement |publisher=Nutriset |url=http://www.nutriset.fr/en/access/patents-for-development/online-patent-usage-agreement.html |access-date=10 August 2010}}</ref>
The Plumpy'Nut patents in the USA expired in 2017 ({{cite patent|country=US|number=6346284|status=patent}}), and in the UK and the European Union in 2018 ({{cite patent|country=EP|number=1032280|status=patent}}).
==See also==
| |||