I'm not aware of any examples of bioprospecting that have led to such outcomes. US patents don't apply outside of the United States, so the patents have little impact on medicine supplies in the home countries. The objection is about who gets to make money off of selling these things in the US market.
I can't see where that has anything to do with biopiracy. Plenty of crops that are indigenous to the America are grown the world over, depriving American farmers the profits that would ensue from protected status as producers. For example, potatos and tomatoes. And, likewise, piracy of the myriad American goods the world over also negatively impact America's economy. For our part, we at least provide institutions with mechanisms for the farmers in India to seek redress if they feel they're being ripped off (as your link describes).
That the contestants don't always get the outcome they're seeking doesn't imply that there isn't a meaningful process in place. "Legal action" is precisely the mechanism I was referring to. The patent office isn't some neocolonial cabal dedicated to pillaging the developing world. If you can demonstrate prior art, they'll invalidate the patents. For that matter, there's nothing to stop people from patenting this stuff themselves in the first place. It's worth noting that the outcry over this stuff is based on misconceptions about what is and is not being patented, as is described in your quote.
They have legal protection under international copyright law. It also goes beyond medicines to things like yoga. It just goes to show how desperately copyright laws need to be changed... copyrighting things existing hundreds to thousands of years... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
No, patents and copyrights are separate concepts governed by separate bodies of law. The only way a US patent applies anywhere outside the US is if another country makes a law stating that it will respect and enforce American patents. For that matter, international copyright law works the same way. You can't copyright yoga; you have to come up with a modified version that is sufficiently original (although it doesn't have to be all that original). And, even then, everyone else is free to continue practicing yoga with no restrictions.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/07/opinion/07mehta.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 The article implies that it does restrict others, but it doesn't go into details. Here is a link of so called Bikram yoga: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/07/opinion/07mehta.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 About half of them I personally know are not originally his. OK then, but it is the same in effect.
I'm quite familiar with Bikram yoga, and what you need to understand is that the copyright in question doesn't cover any particular pose (all of which are standard, well-known yoga poses whose ownership could never be successfully defended in a court of law). The copyright covers the name, method (which is 26 specific poses, in a specific order, with specific breathing exercises, in a specific setting -- the heated room is the hallmark of Bikram yoga) and associated instructional techniques. If you want to come up with an Exhumed Yoga consisting of some set of common yoga moves in, say, a cold room and copyright that, Bikram won't be able to stop you. Likewise, if you want to start a regular yoga studio with no temperature-controlled rooms, Bikram won't be able to do anything about that either, as long as you don't call it "Bikram" or something dumb like that. It also bears mentioning that the more extravagent intellectual property claims that Bikram has made are very much in contention, and it is far from clear that he will come out on top. You should wait for the courts to settle the cases before pronouncing it a failure of the legal system. Moreover, Bikram is an Indian who started this school in India, so it's hard to see how this has much of anything to do with cultural imperialism. Pilates is a similar situation. The point is that in neither case does it impinge on the rights or abilities of anyone, anywhere in the world, to practice/teach/write about/etc. traditional yoga techniques and methods. You just can't copy their exact, specific routines or use their names. It's not a big deal. For some reason the Indian authorities are hysterical about this kind of stuff and so overreact whenever it comes up. The point is that if people in the countries in question feel their rights are being trampled by US copyright and patent practices, their governments are free to repeal the laws and treaties that bind them together. Of course, by reciprocity, America is then no longer bound to honor their intellectual property either. Moreover, there's absoutely nothing to stop people from anywhere in the world from patenting and copyrighting this stuff, both in their own countries and in the US, nor is there anything to stop them from contesting the legitimacy of said patents and copyrights. So I'm having a hard time seeing how it's unfair.
S.A.M: May I remind everyone that this is supposed to be a thread about INDIA? Once again, S.A.M is merely use her famed 'derail' tactic.
Indians are dirty after bathing in the Ganges. http://www.indmedica.com/journals.php?journalid=7&issueid=63&articleid=782&action=article
