The history of art and fashion is full of intriguing and inspiring stories about bright creative minds who managed to patent their ideas, designs, machines and products.
Think about Loïe Fuller: a figure almost reminiscent of a polymath à la Mariano Fortuny, Fuller was not only a dancer and choreographer of her own performances, but a genuine inventor. She created indeed her visually mesmerising light-filled performances and held patents for her costumes, stage design and ground-breaking lighting techniques.
Fuller held patents in France and Great Britain from 1893 and received US patents as well for at least three of her inventions - a "Mechanism for the Production of Stage Effects", a "Theatrical Stage Mechanism for Producing Illusory Effects" and a "Garment for Dancers" (US Patents 513102, 533167, and 518347).
Yesterday we looked at Janine Janet's works and, in 1954, the artist and designer applied for a patent for a mannequin in transparent Rhodoid and Plexiglass that could have featured decorations inside its body, such as dried flowers. But Janet also worked with innovative materials and a company collaborating with her, Normacem, applied for the patent for Panlame, rigid vinyl sheets between which one could incorporate ornamental elements, such as Janet's signature feathers.
Fashionistas may also remember how Italian shoemaker Salvatore Ferragamo registered over 360 patents between 1927 and 1964, that referred to shoes and shoe parts as well, something that proved he had extraordinary foresight.
The big news of the week revolved around patents: the Biden-Harris administration announced indeed its decision to support the request at the World Trade Organization (WTO) to waive patents on COVID-19 vaccines.
This decision came months after India and South Africa, worried that richer countries would have dominated the COVID-19 vaccine manufacturing, made a proposal at the WTO to waive intellectual property (IP) protections for Coronavirus vaccines. They received the support of more than 100 emerging countries, but not of the wealthier ones. Australia, Canada, the EU, the UK and the US opposed indeed the proposal (the US always opted to support patent protection; in the past the country opposed for example the possibility of scrapping patents on HIV drugs).
The Biden administration announced on Wednesday that it was changing its decision about waiving patents, though its position regarding the treatment or the technology used to fight the disease remained the same.
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF; Doctors without borders) applauded the US government's decision, adding that the waiver should also cover other medical tools for COVID-19, including treatments for people who fall ill and diagnostics to help curb the spread.
In a press release the charity highlighted that many of the low-income countries in which the charity operates have only received 0.3 percent of global COVID-19 vaccine supply while the US has secured enough doses to protect its entire population and still have more than half a billion surplus vaccines left over.
Infection rates are going down in wealthier countries thanks to vaccines and many of us are thinking about a post-Covid world where holidays, going to the cinema and the theatre or the gym are once again possible and there is a gradual return to normality. Yet poorer countries are experiencing new waves and situations of great emergency. The Covid surge in India and Nepal is pushing them on the edge of a human catastrophe and the countries recently registered 414,188 and 9,070 infections respectively.
Pharmaceutical companies reacted negatively to the US decision, as sharing patents would mean losing money for them. The UK and Europe do not seem to agree with the US decision: Ursula von der Leyen, the head of the European Commission, stated yesterday that Europe was ready to discuss the proposal, but Germany mentioned possible complications for vaccine production.
In Italy critics mentioned the ground-breaking Venetian statute of 1474, the earliest modern patent system that encouraged technological advancement and innovation; others highlighted that scientists may not be motivated to research if a drug or vaccine they may discover is produced for free by different companies all over the world, and that patents are vital to cover the investments that went into the research and development stages.
One key point is that vaccines must be produced in sterile plants by workers with the technological know-how and if waiving a patent may not help countries with no infrastructures to produce a vaccine. That's why campaigners in favour of patent waiving also request that companies that own vaccines also contribute to set up factories and train the staff.
This may not be that easy as the World Trade Organization can not force them to do so (but national governments can instead do it). Critics of the plan state that patent waiving may not help solving the global shortage as the lack of infrastructures and know-how will not guarantee an immediate increase in production. Such critics also highlight that shortages of key materials to produce vaccines, from bags to vials, is having an impact on the production of vaccines, so one solution for these critics would be to drop trade barriers to avoid scarcity in supply chains.
What's for sure is that negotiations will take time: the WTO acts by consensus and to adopt the waiver the UK, Canada and the EU will have to support it. Still it is not impossible to make this happen and to do so the UK and Europe will have to do their part.
The fear is that waiving one patent will imply to waive others, but these are unprecedented times. COVID-19 impoverished many and made very few very rich: by protecting the patents multinational companies will multiply their profits and interests, but if we don't protect others (consider also the number of people unregistered with national health services, such as migrants, refugees and asylum seekers) we won't be able to protect ourselves.
Last year as Coronavirus spread in China we didn't care as much as we should have; when infections rates skyrocketed in Italy, many European countries pretended it wasn't happening underestimating the emergency. Then the virus spread all over Europe and, well, we know the rest of the story. Ignoring the cries of India or Nepal, denying that catastrophe in other countries is happening because we want to go out to a pub or a restaurant as we have received our vaccines will not ensure us lives will go back to normal again. As MSF highlights: "The longer it takes to vaccinate everyone in the world, the greater the risk to us all as new variants have more opportunity to take hold."
In conclusion, while protecting an invention is always the proper thing to do, one thing is protecting the design of a pair of shoes and another to protect a vaccine that may save millions of lives. So waiving intellectual property rights in this case may be a tiny step towards equality and it is also a question of morality that needs to be addresses with urgency.
"Countries that continue to oppose the WTO waiver, such as European Union countries, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Canada, Australia, Norway, Japan, and Brazil must now take action, too, and decide to put people's health before pharmaceutical profits and waive IP on all COVID-19 medical tools, including vaccines," concludes MSF's Avril Benoît.
Well researched. Pfizer's profits have been astromonical. It's time to make exceptions.
Posted by: Kmaustral | May 07, 2021 at 10:05 PM