From Antiquity to the COVID-19 Pandemic : The Intellectual Property of Medicines and Access to Health - A Sourcebook

The COVID-19 pandemic has magnified the tensions inherent in the interface of proprietary medicines and the strong reaction of society at large in respect of pharmaceutical inventors and rights holders. As this comprehensive collection of sources shows, these tensions have persisted since ancient times. The sources—along with headnotes and a deeply informed preamble—clearly illustrate how society has constructed intellectual property in association with medicines to adapt it to the needs of entrepreneurship and free trade, and, at the same time, accommodating it to the imperatives of public health. Revealing two major lines of tension—trademarks versus generic designations and patents versus trade secrets—the texts deal with such aspects of the special intellectual property of medicines and access to health as the following: the question of whether inventions that are crucially important to save lives should be left in private hands to be exploited with a view on profitability; prohibiting the use of trademarks to designate certain medicines; loss of distinctiveness of some well-known pharmaceutical trademarks; sanitary authorities as a sort of a parallel trademark and patent office; the requirement of higher distinctiveness for pharmaceutical trademarks—the so-called duty of greater care; use of secrecy to secure private interests in pharmaceutical inventions; granting prizes and awards to inventors instead of acknowledging private proprietary rights in pharmaceuticals; and the protection of inventions in times of epidemics. The sources are structured in two chapters (business identifiers—trademarks, geographical indications, shop signs—and appropriation of knowledge—patents, trade secrets) to permit an easy understanding of the enchainment of important moments that have contributed to give intellectual property for medicines its special configuration. The selection of sources (more than 200) underlines the struggle of creative entrepreneurs in the pharmaceutical field to obtain a living from their trade and all the contradictions to which it gives rise, as well as approaches that governments have adopted to deal with its tensions. Practitioners in intellectual property law and healthcare law, magistrates, medical professionals, and academics will have a better sense of how the imperatives of public health have designed and continue designing norms and principles of intellectual property especially adapted to the social goals it serves. Cover Half Title Title page Copyright Table of Contents Table of Illustrations Preamble CHAPTER 1 The Business Identifiers of Medicines and Access to Health § 1.01. TERRA SIGILLATA—THE GREEK ISLAND OF LEMNOS EXPORTS ITS BRANDED MEDICINAL EARTH, WITH REPUTED THERAPEUTIC EFFECTS—SECOND CENTURY BC § 1.01.1. Dioscorides’ observations on Lemnian earth and the seals used to brand it (c. 40 AD-c. 90 AD) § 1.01.2. Galen (Claudius Galenus) (c. 129 AD-c. 200 AD) describes his visit to Lemnos and what he learned about the preparation of Lemnian earth § 1.01.3. Jean de Renou (1568-c. 1620) explains the difference between the genuine earth of Lemnos and its most common counterfeits § 1.02. ROMAN OPHTHALMOLOGISTS’ TRADEMARKS AND SLOGANS—FIRST CENTURY BC-THIRD CENTURY AD § 1.02.1. Graffiti and inscriptions on an ophthalmologist’s stamp § 1.02.2. Graffiti and inscriptions on another ophthalmologist’s stamp § 1.03. IN VENICE, PHARMACISTS WERE REQUIRED TO DESIGNATE MEDICINES WITH COMMON NAMES § 1.04. LAWS REGULATING THE PROFESSION OF APOTHECARIES IN PARIS—FOURTEENTH CENTURY § 1.04.1. Directive determining the inspection of Paris apothecaries’ remedies by the physicians of the [medical] school § 1.04.2. Directive on the exercise of the profession of apothecary and herbalist, subjecting them to the inspection § 1.05. FRENCH AUTHORITIES START ACKNOWLEDGING APOTHECARIES’ INDIVIDUAL AND COLLECTIVE TRADEMARKS—EARLY SIXTEENTH CENTURY § 1.05.1. By-laws of the Apothecaries-Wax Makers-Grocers, written at the Hotel-de-Ville of Rouen, by three medical doctors and by three Apothecaries-Wax Makers-Grocers § 1.05.2. Letters for the separation of the profession of an apothecary from that of a grocer, and on the mode of election of the trustees, and the reception of the apprentices § 1.06. THE INTENSIVE USE OF JARS BY APOTHECARIES IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY GIVES RISE TO A NEW LINE OF POTTERY PRODUCTS: THE APOTHECARIES’ JARS. AN EXAMPLE FROM ROUEN: MASSEOT ABAQUESNE. § 1.07. JEAN DE RENOU, A FRENCH PHYSICIAN (C. 1568-C. 1620), DESCRIBES A TYPICAL DRUGSTORE AND MENTIONS ITS MOST DISTINCTIVE ELEMENT—THE ESTHETICAL FEATURES OF PHARMACEUTICAL JARS AND CONTAINERS § 1.08. THE IMPORTANCE OF CERTIFICATION MARKS IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY GROWS IN THE EARLY SEVENTEENTH CENTURY § 1.09. A COURT SETTLES THE DISPUTE BETWEEN TWO APOTHECARIES WHO USED THE SAME SHOP SIGN—A RED CROSS—TO IDENTIFY AND DIFFERENTIATE THEIR BUSINESSES § 1.10. IN THE SIXTEENTH AND SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES, WITH THE GROWTH IN THE NUMBER OF DRUGSTORES, PHARMACISTS INTENSIFIED THE USE OF SHOP SIGNS § 1.11. IN 1638, THE BY-LAWS OF THE GUILD OF THE APOTHECARIES AND WAX MAKERS OF PARIS REQUIRED THE LATTER TO HAVE INDIVIDUAL TRADEMARKS § 1.12. A FRENCH APOTHECARY, ELIE DE SEIGNETTE (1632-1698), USED SEVERAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY TOOLS TO ASSERT HIS PROPRIETARY INTERESTS IN THE MEDICINE HE INVENTED WITH HIS BROTHER, THE SALT OF POLYCHRESTE: TRADE SECRECY, TRADE NAME, TRADEMARK, A PATENT § 1.12.1. Elie Seignette explains how he and his brother invented the salt of polychrest and the troubles they faced to keep it exclusive § 1.12.2. Notice by the Royal Academy of Sciences on the composition of the Salt of Seignette § 1.12.3. Advertisement of the True Salt of Polychrest, in the Mercure de France [a French gazette and literary magazine] § 1.13. THREE RENOWNED ITALIAN CHARLATANS, DESIDERIO DESCOMBES, LEVANTIN AND CONTUGI, AND THEIR DISPUTES AND CONTROVERSIES ON THE EXCLUSIVE MAKING AND DISTRIBUTION OF A FAMOUS ANTIDOTE—THE ORVIETAN § 1.13.1. One of the many recipes of Orvietan, as it was described in a treatise on drugs § 1.13.2. One of the several patent letters authorizing Desiderio Descombes to make and sell Orvietan in various parts of France, on the condition that he did not engage in the practice of medicine and surgery § 1.13.3. Desiderio Descombes advertises his Orvietan on the Pont-Neuf, Paris, by staging theatrical representations, and magical tricks § 1.13.4. Judgment by Parliament of Aix-en-Provence granting Antoine Levantin exclusivity in the use of the term “Orvietan” to designate his antidote § 1.13.5. Settlement of a dispute between Contugy and the Corporation of Apothecaries-Grocers of Paris concerning the making and selling of Orviétan, its various business identifiers, and the right of inspection at Contugy’s shop § 1.13.6. Judgment by the private Council in favor of Christophle Contugi, known as the true Orviétan, against Poloni, pseudo-Orviétan § 1.13.7. Report of another judgment [on the conflicting use of the name Orvietan] (by an unspecified court) § 1.14. ANOTHER EVIDENCE THAT IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY THE USE OF TRADEMARKS BY DRUGGISTS HAD ALREADY BECOME A COMMON PRACTICE: THE BY-LAWS OF THEIR GUILD IN THE FRENCH CITY OF SAINT-QUENTIN § 1.15. PRIVILEGE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE DISTRIBUTION OF MINERAL WATERS, WHICH WERE TO BE DESIGNATED BY A CERTIFICATION MARK, ALONG WITH THEIR TRADEMARKS—1739 § 1.16. A FRENCH DRUGGIST OBTAINS PATENT LETTERS PERMITTING HIM TO SELL AND ADVERTISE A SECRET MEDICINE WITHOUT ANY ENCUMBRANCE FROM PHYSICIANS AND APOTHECARIES § 1.16.1. Judgment of the Great Council that orders the enforcement of the Letters in the form of a Provision of the Profession and Distributor of the King, belonging to the Court, and of its Councils, granted to Mr. Pierre-Raimond Vaconssain, Merchant Gr § 1.16.2. Piece of advertisement published by Vacossain promoting his medicine, whose genuineness was confirmed by his seal and signature § 1.16.3. Another piece of advertisement of Vaconssain’s purgative powder, this time under the disguise of a press editorial § 1.17. AN APOTHECARY DISPUTES WITH GROCERS THE QUALIFIED PRIVILEGE OF EXERCISING THE PROFESSION OF PHARMACY, WITH IMPLICATIONS ON THE USE OF SHOP SIGNS—1773 § 1.18. A BRITISH DRUGGIST CREATES HIS OWN LABEL TO ENSURE THE GENUINENESS OF THE PRODUCTS OF HIS TRADE § 1.18.1. Announcement of the method that William Bacon created to ensure the genuineness of the drugs he sold in his store, the Royal Patent Medicine Warehouse § 1.18.2. Advertisement of the Spa Elixir in Bacon’s prospectus § 1.18.3. Specification of the Patent on the Spa Elixir granted to Thomas Gale § 1.19. THE MAKER AND SELLER OF ÁGUA DE INGLATERRA (WATER OF ENGLAND), A POPULAR SECRET MEDICINE IN PORTUGAL AND BRAZIL, OBTAINS (AND LOSES) EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS IN HIS TRADEMARKS, INCLUDING THE MEDICINE’S GENERIC NAME § 1.19.1. License for the making and selling of Água de Inglaterra § 1.19.2. In a booklet, André Lopes de Castro, introducer of Água de Inglaterra [Water of England] in Portugal, advertises that he has communicated the secret composition to his wife and son and warns against counterfeits § 1.19.3. The maker of Agua de Inglaterra receives permission to designate its manufacture as Royal Manufacture § 1.19.4. The Prince Regent of Portugal approves Castro’s request that enforcement measures be taken to stop the generalized counterfeiting of his medicine § 1.19.5. Castro’s son and heir is authorized to sell Água da Inglaterra without the need to disclose the secret § 1.19.6. Castro obtains the exclusive right in the use of the designation “Agoa de Inglaterra” and the confirmation of the designation of his factory as “Royal Manufacture” § 1.19.7. An apothecary challenges José Joaquim de Castro’s right to the exclusive making of Água de Inglaterra and use of its generic designation § 1.20. THE BRITISH HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY GRANTS AN INJUNCTION SECURING EXCLUSIVITY IN MEDICINE EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF A PATENT § 1.21. THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT ADOPTS A REGULATION FOR THE TERRITORY OF THE LOW COUNTRIES (BELGIUM), PROVIDING FOR THE MANDATORY USE OF COMMON NAMES AND THE (CERTIFYING) SIGNATURE OF APOTHECARIES FOR DESIGNATING MEDICINES AND THEIR INGREDIENTS § 1.21.1. Instructions approved by Royal Decree of May 31, 1818, for the Doctors of Medicine, Surgeons of the Cities and of the Interior, Obstetricians, Apothecaries, Midwives, and Druggists of the Lower Countries § 1.21.2. Additional provisions on the designation of medicines on medical prescriptions in Belgium § 1.22. THOMAS HOLLOWAY AND HIS PILLS AND OINTMENT—A SUCCESSFUL COMBINATION OF SECRECY, TRADEMARKS (AND THEIR ENFORCEMENT), AND INTENSIVE ADVERTISEMENT § 1.22.1. Holloway sues his brother for trademark infringement § 1.22.2. A sarcastic article on the ointment sold by Albinolo, who claimed that Holloway had stolen its composition from him § 1.22.3. A report on the lawsuit initiated by the Swedish physician Sillen against Holloway, involving the permission to sell Holloway’s ointment in France § 1.22.4. Notice of another litigation episode involving Holloway’s trademark, this time involving a distributor of his pills and ointment in South America § 1.22.5. Examples of advertisements of Holloway’s pills and ointments § 1.22.6. Hansfstaengl Art Publishing Company and another v. Holloway, a case of copyright infringement by Thomas Holloway’s heirs—1893 § 1.22.7. Another instance of trademark enforcement by Holloway’s heirs § 1.23. A FRENCH COURT HOLDS THAT A BUSINESS IDENTIFIER CANNOT BE USED FOR INDIRECTLY SECURING EXCLUSIVITY IN A SECRET MEDICINE COMPOSITION § 1.23.1. Contract as per which Laffecteur assigned his name to Boyveau, inventor and distributor of the Syrup Boyveau-Leffacteur § 1.23.2. Laffecteur obtains the permission to distribute his Anti-Syphilitic Syrup and exclusive rights in his trademarks § 1.23.3. A French Court acknowledges the rights of pharmacists to use the designation of a medicine made and sold by a competitor, even if that designation contains the latter’s name, provided that designation has become a necessary designation and addit § 1.24. A US DISTRICT COURT ACKNOWLEDGES THE EXCLUSIVE EFFECTS OF A GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION FOR MEDICINAL SALTS—1898 § 1.25. THE CASE OF VASELINE, DESIGNATION OF PETROLEUM JELLY: THE VICISSITUDES OF SECURING TRADEMARK RIGHTS IN POPULAR MEDICINES § 1.25.1. Excerpts from the specifications of Robert A Chesebrough’s 1878 US Patent for new products from petroleum, where he employed the term “Vaseline” several times to designate his invention § 1.25.2. A British court denies trademark protection to the word “Vaseline” because, having being used by its inventor in the patent specifications as the product’s indication, has become a necessary, generic designation § 1.25.3. No matter how generalized the use of a trademark has been, its owner is entitled to its protection—so has decided a United States Court § 1.25.4. Justice Timlin, of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, in a dissenting vote, expressed his reservations as to the registrability as trademarks of words (like “vaseline”) which, in his view, had become a generic designation § 1.25.5. Decision by a French Court: the trademark “Vaseline” has been abandoned due to laches § 1.25.6. Vaseline deemed to be a generic designation in Germany § 1.26. A SCOTTISH COURT DENIES TRADEMARK PROTECTION TO A COMPANY THAT, FOR ACHIEVING COMMERCIAL SUCCESS IN THE SALE OF A MEDICINE, SYSTEMATICALLY LIED TO CONSUMERS ALLEGING THE MEDICINES’ FICTITIOUS ORIGINS IN AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINAL PEOPLE’S TRADITIONAL K § 1.27. A US FEDERAL COURT OF APPEALS HELD THAT SELLERS OF MEDICINES ARE ENTITLED TO USE EXPRESSIONS OF BOASTING OR PUFFING ABOUT THE QUALITIES OF THE DRUGS § 1.28. EUGENE POUILLET, A RENOWNED FRENCH JURIST, EXPLAINS HOW IN THE LATE NINETEENTH AND EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURIES, FRENCH COURTS SET THE CRITERIA FOR DISTINGUISHING PROTECTABLE PHARMACEUTICAL TRADEMARKS FROM GENERIC DESIGNATIONS § 1.29. THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT REPORTS ON THE FREQUENTLY DECEPTIVE BRANDING OF SECRET (PATENT) MEDICINES § 1.30. IN THE UNITED STATES, THE BRAND FOR ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID—ASPIRIN—GOES GENERIC (IN PART), AND IN THE UNITED KINGDOM, THE MEDICINE LOSES PATENT PROTECTION § 1.30.1. A US District Court held “aspirin” as a generic trademark, in part § 1.30.2. Excerpt from the specifications of the United States patent for acetylsalicylic acid (“aspirin”) § 1.30.3. The Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice (England) held that the patent on acetylsalicylic acid is invalid (1905) § 1.30.4. A German Court holds that the use of the trademark “Aspirin” by a competitor of Bayer, while an informative element of its own product, is, under the circumstances, a legitimate trade practice § 1.30.5. Advertisement and notices concerning the successful enforcement of the trademark “Aspirin” published in a Canadian newspaper, 1936 and 1937 § 1.31. A UNITED STATES FEDERAL COURT AFFIRMS THE REQUIREMENT OF GREATER CARE IN SETTING THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF MEDICINE TRADEMARKS § 1.32. FOR THE SAKE OF PUBLIC HEALTH, THE UNICEF AND THE WHO ORDER THE REDUCTION OF THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF TRADEMARKS CONCERNING BREAST-MILK SUBSTITUTES § 1.32.1. International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes (excerpts) § 1.32.2. Guatemala’s law on the marketing of breast-milk substitutes (excerpt) § 1.32.3. Guatemala’s regulation on the marketing of breast-milk substitutes (excerpts) § 1.33. THE IMPEDIMENT TO THE USE OF TRADEMARKS AS A MANNER TO PRESS GENERIC PHARMACEUTICAL PRICES DOWNWARDS—THE EXAMPLE THAT COMES FROM BRAZIL § 1.34. PROPRIETARY NAMES OF PHARMACEUTICAL SUBSTANCES VERSUS NONPROPRIETARY NAMES § 1.35. SPAIN PROHIBITS THE DESIGNATION OF MEDICINES BY TRADEMARKS ON MEDICAL PRESCRIPTIONS § 1.36. TOBACCO PLAIN PACKAGING—ANOTHER ASSAULT ON TRADEMARKS’ DISTINCTIVENESS FOR THE SAKE OF PUBLIC HEALTH § 1.36.1. Australia—Certain Measures Concerning Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging Requirements Applicable to Tobacco Products and Packaging § 1.36.2. Australia’s Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011 (Excerpts) CHAPTER 2 The Private Appropriation of Pharmaceutical Knowledge (Patents, Trade Secrets, Printing Privileges) § 2.01. THE SECRET MEDICINE OF ANTONIUS PACCHIUS—FIRST CENTURY AD § 2.02. PLINY THE ELDER COMMENDS THE INVENTIVE LABOR OF THOSE WHO FIND NEW MEDICINES IN NATURE BUT CRITICIZES THEIR GREED AND THEIR “SECRET SPIRIT”—FIRST CENTURY AD § 2.03. OATH OF SECRECY BY THE NEW MASTER APOTHECARIES IN PARIS—FOURTEENTH CENTURY § 2.04. JACOPO DI DONDI RECEIVES AN INDUSTRIAL PRIVILEGE FOR A PROCESS OF EXTRACTING MEDICINAL SALT FROM THE THERMAL WATERS OF ABANO, ITALY—1355 § 2.05. THE ORDINANCES OF THE GROCERS’ COMPANY AND THE OBLIGATION OF APPRENTICES TO KEEP TRADE SECRETS—1525 § 2.06. A SECRET SURGICAL METHOD—1550 § 2.07. ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF THE APPROPRIATION OF PHARMACEUTICAL KNOWLEDGE: PRINTING PRIVILEGES, SECRETS, REPUTATION § 2.07.1. Alessio Piemontese, Prologue to his book De Secreti § 2.07.2. Excerpt from the Privilege to the Belgian edition of Piemontese’s De Secreti § 2.07.3. Excerpts from the Preamble to the Revealed Secrets of the Arts, both of Pharmacy and of Distillation, commonly called Alchemy, or Spargyric: through which perfection will be reached, both in Theory and in practice, in making gold drinkable, succ § 2.07.4. Extract from the exclusive privilege granted to Roussel for having his book on the Secrets of Arts printed, exhibited and sold—1612 § 2.08. CHRISTIAN IV, OF DENMARK, ACQUIRES THE SECRET FORMULA OF THE OINTMENTS OF TERKEL ESKILDSEN, A DANISH PEASANT—1621 § 2.09. THE FIRST BRITISH PATENT FOR A MEDICAL DEVICE—1629 § 2.10. THE BY-LAWS AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SWORN APOTHECARIES OF METZ PROHIBIT THE “DÉBAUCHAGE”—MAY 22, 1631 § 2.11. DURING THE 1636 EPIDEMICS OF THE BUBONIC PLAGUE IN LONDON, CHARLES I ORDERED THE PUBLICATION OF INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO PREPARE CHEAP MEDICINES § 2.12. SUED BY THE APOTHECARIES OF BEAUNE, FRANCE, A DRESSMAKER, OWNER OF A SECRET MEDICINAL FORMULA, WAS AUTHORIZED TO CONTINUE DISTRIBUTING IT, PROVIDED SHE WOULD NOT CHARGE FOR IT—1661 § 2.13. SOME COMMERCIAL PRIVILEGES GRANTED TO MOUNTEBANKS DURING THE REIGN OF CHARLES II, INCLUDING THE LICENSE FOR ERECTING STAGES—1665 ONWARDS § 2.13.1. License to George Moretto, 1665 § 2.13.2. License to Joanees Michapilo, 1667 § 2.13.3. License to John Ryssell, 1667 § 2.13.4. Certificate and license in favor of Toussain Le Jond, 1667 § 2.13.5. License to John Baptista Quaranteni, 1668 § 2.13.6. Licence to Tamberlaine Harvey, 1673 § 2.14. CHARLES II, OF ENGLAND, CREATES A SPECIAL PUBLIC POST—OF CHEMICAL PHYSICIAN—FOR THOMAS WILLIAMS, A PHYSICIAN AND INVENTOR OF NEW MEDICINES—1669 § 2.15. IN 1670, UNDER THE CHARTER OF THE GUILD OF THE APOTHECARIES OF LONDON, APPRENTICES WERE REQUESTED TO TAKE AN OATH OF SECRECY § 2.16. CHARLES II BUYS THE SECRET OF A MEDICINAL FORMULA CREATED BY JONATHAN GODDARD—C. 1670 § 2.16.1. Jonathan Goddard defends the private appropriation of physicians’ inventions concerning new medicines, either by patents or trade secrets § 2.16.2. A [wrong] account of the composition of Dr. Goddard’s drops § 2.16.3. Martin Lister, English Doctor, reveals the real composition of Goddard’s Drops, which was given to him personally by King Charles II § 2.16.4. Cristopher Merrett, physician, attacks the apothecaries on their greed and appoints Dr. Goddard as an example of the physician’s honesty in charging fair prices for his drug § 2.16.5. An anonymous group of apothecaries responds to Dr. Merrett’s accusations § 2.17. A TRADE SECRET CONCERNING A MEDICAL DEVICE: THE INVENTION OF THE OBSTETRICAL FORCEPS § 2.18. THE INVENTOR OF A MEDICINAL OINTMENT (ANTIHEMORRHAGIC) SELLS HIS SECRET TO SEVERAL EUROPEAN KINGS—1673 § 2.18.1. Weber’s styptic liquor by Dr. Silva Carvalho (excerpt) § 2.18.2. Waldshmits appoints a French surgeon, Mons. Vivens, as the inventor of the antihemorrhagic liquor § 2.18.3. An Account of the Experiments promised at the end of the next precedent transactions concerning the wonderful effects of the Blood staunching liquor upon a Man and a Woman in St. Thomas’s Hospital in Southwark London § 2.19. THE KING OF FRANCE, LOUIS XIV, ACQUIRES THE FORMULA OF A SECRET MEDICINE AND ORDERS ITS DISCLOSURE § 2.19.1. An account of Robert Talbor’s secret medicine, its success in English and French kings’ courts, and the purchase of its formula by Louis XIV § 2.19.2. Supplement of the Journal of Medicine published by order of the King § 2.20. HELVETIUS (C. 1661-1724), A DUTCH PHYSICIAN AND INVENTOR IN THE MEDICAL FIELD, WAS REWARDED BY LOUIS XIV WITH SEVERAL FAVORS IN EXCHANGE FOR THE DISCLOSURE OF ONE OF HIS SECRET MEDICINES § 2.20.1. A sketch of the life and the events surrounding Helvetius’ invention and his rewards § 2.20.2. Letters Patent granting permission to Adrien Helvetius, Doctor of Medicine, naturalized French, to distribute alone throughout the Kingdom his specific against stomach colic, the flow of blood, and dysentery § 2.20.3. Decision by the Parliament settling the dispute between Garnier Chapelier and Helvetius, concerning some alleged arrears by the latter in the payment of some quantities of ipecacuanha roots, which he used in preparing his famous medicine against § 2.20.4. Prologue to Helvetius’ treatise, Méthode pour Guérir toute Sorte de Fièvres—1694 § 2.21. NEHEMIAH GREW OBTAINS THE FIRST ENGLISH PATENT FOR A MEDICINE UNDER THE STATUTE OF 1624—JULY 15, 1698 § 2.22. A FRENCH DOCTOR ATTACKS THE PRIVATE APPROPRIATION OF MEDICINES THROUGH SECRECY ON ETHICAL AND RELIGIOUS GROUNDS—1708 § 2.23. CREATIVE PHARMACISTS FIND THE WAY TO THE BRITISH PATENT OFFICE: THE SECOND BRITISH PATENT FOR A MEDICINAL COMPOSITION WAS GRANTED IN 1711 TO TIMOTHY BYFIELD § 2.23.1. Byfield’s Patent – 1711, No. 388 (excerpts) § 2.23.2. Dr. Byfield’s leaflet describing his invention—1712 (?) § 2.24. THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF FRANCE EXAMINES SEVERAL PATENT APPLICATIONS CONCERNING MEDICAL DEVICES—1741 AND 1754 § 2.24.1. Bed for the Disabled, Invented by Mr. Hanot, Carpenter—1741 § 2.24.2. Bandage for Hernias, Invented by Mr. Abeille, Engineer—1742 § 2.24.3. Fan or Ventilator for renewing the air of the room of the sick, established by experiment at the Hotel Royal des Invalides—1748 § 2.24.4. Devices used to vaporize the chest, invented by Mr. Guignon, Surgeon—1754 § 2.25. THE DROPS OF GENERAL DE LA MOTTE: A SECRET MEDICINE PROTECTED BY SEVERAL PRIVILEGES; ADVERTISEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT—TYPICAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF MEDICINES IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY § 2.25.1. Privilege granted to the widow de la Motte, confirming the one granted twelve years before to his late husband, on the occasion of the acquisition by the king of the secret composition of his Drops of de la Motte § 2.25.2. Judgment confirming the conviction of an apothecary of Paris who counterfeited the drops of General de la Motte § 2.25.3. Advertisement of the Drops of General de la Motte § 2.26. JUDGMENT BY THE STATE COUNCIL OF LOUIS XV, OF FRANCE, ACCORDING EXCLUSIVITY TO GUILLAUME ARNOULT, CONCERNING A SECRET RECIPE OF A MEDICINE AGAINST APOPLEXY § 2.26.1. Guillaume Arnoult explains how he has learned the secret composition of the medicine and assigns it to his son § 2.26.2. Judgment of the King’s State Council of August 2, 1748 § 2.26.3. Arnoult advertises the authenticity and the virtues of his secret medicine § 2.26.4. Louis Arnoult advertises a Patent Letter he obtained from the King and announces his trademark as the only evidence of his Sachet’s authenticity § 2.26.5. The widow of Louis Lanfranc Arnoult, son and heir of Guillaume Arnoult, advertises her genuine secret sachet against a counterfeiter—November 24, 1800 § 2.26.6. Leaflet explaining how to use the Sachet and warning against counterfeits § 2.27. JACOB DE CASTRO SARMENTO, A PORTUGUESE PHYSICIAN, ESTABLISHED IN LONDON, DEFENDS THE MERITS OF HIS SECRET IN THE METHOD OF PREPARATION OF A MEDICINE, AS OPPOSED TO THE SECRET IN THE NATURE OF THE INGREDIENTS—1758 § 2.28. LOUIS XV OF FRANCE GRANTS ANOTHER EXCLUSIVE PRIVILEGE FOR A SECRET MEDICINE—1762 § 2.29. A FRENCH PHARMACIST PUBLICIZES THE TWO PRIVILEGES HE HAS GAINED FOR HIS SECRET MEDICINE: ONE PRIVILEGE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE SALE OF THE MEDICINE AND ANOTHER FOR PRINTING AND SELLING HIS BOOKLET—1769 § 2.30. FRANCE ENACTS THE FIRST REGULATION ON THE ACQUISITION OF SECRET MEDICINES BY THE KING—1776 § 2.31. LOUIS XVI ESTABLISHES THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF MEDICINE, WHICH BECOMES VERY CRITICAL OF THE PRIVATE APPROPRIATION OF REMEDIES—1778 ONWARDS § 2.31.1. Letters attributing to the Royal Society of Medicine the examination of new medicines § 2.31.2. The State Council defines the attributions of the Royal Society of Medicine concerning the examination of secret medicines § 2.31.3. The Royal Society of Medicine establishes a procedure for the examination of secret medicines and the public exhibition of those approved—1778 § 2.31.4. The Royal Society of Medicine reports on its experience in examining patent applications for pharmaceutical inventions and requests the National Assembly to ban secrecy, as well as any sort of private property in new medicines § 2.31.5. The French Royal Society of Medicine proposes prizes for new therapeutic methods—1778 § 2.32. AN ATTACK AGAINST THE PATENT SYSTEM, AND PHARMACEUTICAL PATENTS IN PARTICULAR § 2.33. IN ENGLAND, PATENT MEDICINES AND THEIR SECRECY—THE PARADOX EXPLAINED § 2.34. THE FRENCH REVOLUTIONARY ASSEMBLY REVOKES ALL LAWS AND STATUTES CONCERNING THE GUILDS, INCLUDING THOSE OF APOTHECARIES—AND REINSTATES THE MANDATORY INSPECTION OF MEDICINES JUST ONE MONTH LATER—1791 § 2.34.1. March 17, 1791—Decree abolishing all rights of assistance, all masteries and jurandes, and the establishment of patents § 2.34.2. April 17, 1791—Decree relating to the practice of pharmacy, and the sale and distribution of drugs and medicines § 2.35. FRANCE GRANTS THE FIRST UTILITY PATENT (BREVET D’INVENTION) FOR AN INVENTION WITH THERAPEUTIC USES—26 AUGUST, 1791 § 2.36. A BRITISH INVENTOR, WILLIAM BODRUM, OBTAINS A PATENT FOR TWO OF HIS MEDICINES AND ADVERTISES THEIR QUASI-MIRACULOUS POWERS—1799 § 2.37. IN FRANCE, PHARMACISTS ARE REQUIRED TO EXPERIMENT AND DISCLOSE THEIR SECRET MEDICINES TO THE INSPECTORS, WHO WERE BOUND TO KEEP THEIR CONFIDENTIALITY—1802 § 2.38. FRANCE REQUIRES THE PRIOR EXAMINATION OF SECRET MEDICINES, SETS A MECHANISM OF ACQUISITION AND DISCLOSURE OF SOME OF THEM, AND BANS THE TRADE OF THOSE THAT WERE NOT APPROVED—AUGUST 18, 1810 § 2.38.1. The French statute concerning the examination and acquisition of secret medicines § 2.38.2. Case law setting the definition of “secret remedies” for the purposes of the application of the statute of 1810 § 2.38.3. According to a Belgian court, the offer for sale of a secret medicine was, in itself, an unlawful act § 2.39. SEIDLITZ POWDERS—THE PATENT FOR THE INVENTION OF THE SEIDLITZ POWDERS, A VERY SUCCESSFUL MEDICINE, HELD INVALID BECAUSE OF THE DECEPTIVE NATURE OF ITS SPECIFICATION § 2.39.1. Specification of Thomas Field Savory’s patent on the Seidlitz powders § 2.39.2. Decision of the Court of King’s Bench holding that Savory’s patent was unenforceable due to its flawed specification § 2.40. A CHARITABLE NORTH AMERICAN PHYSICIAN FELL IN CONTRADICTION: IN A BOOK, HE OFFERED THE SECRET RECIPES OF SEVERAL MEDICINES EFFECTIVE AGAINST THE EPIDEMIC OF CHOLERA FOR FREE BUT CLAIMED COPYRIGHT EXCLUSIVITY IN THE WORK § 2.41. THE KING OF PORTUGAL, JOÃO VI, GRANTS A BRAZILIAN APOTHECARY A PRIVILEGE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE IMPORTATION AND SALE OF MEDICINAL WATER IN THE PROVINCE OF RIO DE JANEIRO § 2.42. JOSEPH METTEMBERG (17?-1840), FRENCH PHYSICIAN AND INVENTOR OF A MEDICINE AGAINST SCABIES, STRUGGLED TO SECURE PROPRIETARY INTERESTS IN HIS INVENTION § 2.42.1. Extract from the Report on the Public Experiments Made in Paris, with the Antipsoric Quintessence, known as Eau de Mettemberg, renewed in the Hospices de Lille, and confirmed in the Hospitals of Lyon, by order of the Government § 2.42.2. Observations on the safety of the use of Eau de Mettemberg § 2.42.3. Two pieces of advertisement of Eau de Mettemberg, the first in France, the second in Spain § 2.42.4. Specification of Mettemberg’s British Patent—February 26, 1825 § 2.43. THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO DELINKS PATENTS FROM ADMINISTRATIVE PERMISSIONS, THUS ACCORDING PATENTS THEIR CURRENT LEGAL MEANING—THE RIGHT TO EXCLUDE, RATHER THAN THE RIGHT TO USE—1830 § 2.44. FRANCE EXCLUDES MEDICINES FROM PATENTABILITY § 2.45. A FRENCH INVENTOR OBTAINS A PATENT IN ENGLAND FOR A DEVICE FOR PURIFYING THE AIR—1848 § 2.46. THE PHILADELPHIA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE TAKES A CRITICAL STANDING AGAINST SECRETS MEDICINES OR NOSTRUMS—1848 § 2.47. IN THE UNITED STATES, THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DEBATES AND REJECTS A BILL THAT AIMED AT EXCLUDING MEDICINES FROM PATENTABILITY—1849 § 2.48. THE LAW OF TRADE SECRETS, WHICH WAS THEN IN DEVELOPMENT IN ENGLAND, ASSISTS A PHARMACIST TO HOLD THE SECRET IN HIS INVENTED MEDICINE—1851 § 2.49. A BELGIAN COURT DELINKS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS OF MAKING AND USING MEDICINES THAT RESULT FROM A PATENT FROM THE NOTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE PERMISSION TO EXERCISE THE MEDICAL PROFESSION—1857 § 2.50. PORTUGAL REGULATES THE EXAMINATION AND THE LICENSING OF SECRET MEDICINES—1863 § 2.50.1. Royal decision granting authority to the kingdom’s public health council concerning the licensing of secret medicines § 2.50.2. New regulations on the marketing approval of secret medicines § 2.51. A FRENCH PHARMACIST AND INVENTOR, STANISLAS LIMOUSIN, USED VARIOUS MANNERS OF CAPTURING REVENUE FROM HIS INVENTIONS: PATENTS, EXPOSURE IN SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES, ADVERTISING, PARTICIPATION IN INTERNATIONAL EXPOSITIONS, TRADEMARKS (AND THEIR ENFORCEME § 2.51.1. Specification of French patent no. 71,176, of April 15, 1866, for 15 years, concerning a “appareil inhalateur pour respirer de l’oxygène ou tout autre gaz ou vapeur,” [“inhaler device for breathing oxygen or any gas or vapor”], granted to Stanis § 2.51.2. Specification of the Patent Limousin obtained in France for his medicinal cachets § 2.51.3. Extract from the specification of Limousin’s patent on the medicinal cachets issued by the United States Patent Office in 1876 § 2.51.4. A French Court rejects Limousin’s attempt to enforce exclusive rights in the term medicinal cachets § 2.51.5. At the International Congress on Industrial Property, of 1878, Limousin defends a patent system that better serves the interests of inventors in the pharmaceutical sector § 2.52. A PORTUGUESE PHARMACIST OBTAINS A PATENT FOR A SYRUP AGAINST COUGH—1869 § 2.53. AN APPRAISAL OF THE U.S. PATENT SYSTEM AS APPLIED TO MEDICINES IN THE LATE NINETEENTH CENTURY § 2.54. IN 1914, THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT, DISCUSSING ABUSIVE PRACTICES IN CONNECTION WITH THE SALE OF SECRET MEDICINES, DID NOT RECOMMEND THE PROHIBITION OF THEIR COMMERCIALIZATION, BUT RATHER THAT INVENTORS PROVIDED THEIR COMPOSITIONS TO THE AGENCY IN CHA § 2.55. THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION ALERTS AGAINST THE ABUSIVE USE OF THE PATENT SYSTEM TO ENDORSE FAKE MEDICINES AND IN ONE PARTICULAR CASE, HAS ASKED FOR THE INVALIDATION OF ONE PATENT—1917 § 2.56. BRAZIL EXCLUDES PHARMACEUTICAL INVENTIONS FROM PATENTABILITY—1971 § 2.57. THE BIRTH OF THE BOLAR EXEMPTION—THE ROCHE CASE AND THE STATUTE—1984 § 2.57.1. The opinion that has originated the Bolar exemption § 2.57.2. The amendment to the United States Patent Act (Title 35, USC) that introduced the Bolar exemption § 2.58. THE CONTROVERSY OVER PATENTS FOR SURGICAL METHODS—THE CASE OF DR. PALLIN AND HIS INVENTION OF A METHOD TO OPERATE CATARACTS § 2.58.1. Dr. Pallin’s patent § 2.58.2. The amendment to the United States Patent Act (United States Code, Title 35) that eliminated the enforceability of patents for therapeutic and surgical methods § 2.59. BRAZIL INTRODUCES THE EXAMINATION OF PATENT APPLICATIONS BY THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH—2001 § 2.59.1. Law no. 10,196, of February 14, 2001 § 2.59.2. Coordination of the work of the patent office with that of the sanitary agency § 2.60. THE TRIPS COUNCIL HOSTS DEBATES ON ACCESS TO PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS THAT LEAD TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT § 2.61. WITH THE AIM OF OBTAINING TECHNOLOGY CONCERNING THE MAKING OF MEDICINES NECESSARY FOR ITS NATIONAL HEALTH SYSTEM, BRAZIL INTRODUCES A MECHANISM OF PDPs (PARTNERSHIPS FOR PRODUCTIVE DEVELOPMENT) § 2.62. THE EUROPEAN UNION SUBMITS TO THE WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT MECHANISM A COMPLAINT CONCERNING TURKEY’S REQUIREMENT OF TE "The COVID-19 pandemic has magnified the tensions inherent in the interface of proprietary medicines and the strong reaction of society at large in respect of pharmaceutical inventors and rights holders. As this comprehensive collection of sources shows, these tensions have persisted since ancient times. The sources--along with headnotes and a deeply informed preamble--clearly illustrate how society has constructed intellectual property in association with medicines to adapt it to the needs of entrepreneurship and free trade, and, at the same time, accommodating it to the imperatives of public health. Revealing two major lines of tension--trademarks versus generic designations and patents versus trade secrets--the texts deal with such aspects of the special intellectual property of medicines and access to health as the following: the question of whether inventions that are crucially important to save lives should be left in private hands to be exploited with a view on profitability; prohibiting the use of trademarks to designate certain medicines; loss of distinctiveness of some well-known pharmaceutical trademarks; sanitary authorities as a sort of a parallel trademark and patent office; the requirement of higher distinctiveness for pharmaceutical trademarks--the so-called duty of greater care;use of secrecy to secure private interests in pharmaceutical inventions ;granting prizes and awards to inventors instead of acknowledging private proprietary rights in pharmaceuticals ; andthe protection of inventions in times of epidemics. The sources are structured in two chapters (business identifiers--trademarks, geographical indications, shop signs--and appropriation of knowledge--patents, trade secrets) to permit an easy understanding of the enchainment of important moments that have contributed to give intellectual property for medicines its special configuration. The selection of sources (more than 200) underlines the struggle of creative entrepreneurs in the pharmaceutical field to obtain a living from their trade and all the contradictions to which it gives rise, as well as approaches that governments have adopted to deal with its tensions. Practitioners in intellectual property law and healthcare law, magistrates, medical professionals, and academics will have a better sense of how the imperatives of public health have designed and continue designing norms and principles of intellectual property especially adapted to the social goals it serves."--Quatrième de couverture The COVID-19 pandemic has magnified the tensions inherent in the interface of proprietary medicines and the strong reaction of society at large in respect of pharmaceutical inventors and rights holders. As this comprehensive collection of sources shows, these tensions have persisted since ancient times. The sources--along with headnotes and a deeply informed preamble--clearly illustrate how society has constructed intellectual property in association with medicines to adapt it to the needs of entrepreneurship and free trade, and, at the same time, accommodating it to the imperatives of public health. Revealing two major lines of tension--trademarks versus generic designations and patents versus trade secrets--the texts deal with such aspects of the special intellectual property of medicines and access to health as the following: the question of whether inventions that are crucially important to save lives should be left in private hands to be exploited with a view on profitability; prohibiting the use of trademarks to designate certain medicines; loss of distinctiveness of some well-known pharmaceutical trademarks; sanitary authorities as a sort of a parallel trademark and patent office; the requirement of higher distinctiveness for pharmaceutical trademarks--the so-called duty of greater care; use of secrecy to secure private interests in pharmaceutical inventions; granting prizes and awards to inventors instead of acknowledging private proprietary rights in pharmaceuticals; and the protection of inventions in times of epidemics. The sources are structured in two chapters (business identifiers--trademarks, geographical indications, shop signs--and appropriation of knowledge--patents, trade secrets) to permit an easy understanding of the enchainment of important moments that have contributed to give intellectual property for medicines its special configuration. The selection of sources (more than 200) underlines the struggle of creative entrepreneurs in the pharmaceutical field to obtain a living from their trade and all the contradictions to which it gives rise, as well as approaches that governments have adopted to deal with its tensions. Practitioners in intellectual property law and healthcare law, magistrates, medical professionals, and academics will have a better sense of how the imperatives of public health have designed and continue designing norms and principles of intellectual property especially adapted to the social goals it serves.ISBN : 9789403528502