z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Intellectual Property and Access to ART: Authors' Reply
Author(s) -
Arachu Castro,
Michael Westerhaus
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
plos medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 4.847
H-Index - 228
eISSN - 1549-1676
pISSN - 1549-1277
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030510
Subject(s) - intellectual property , argument (complex analysis) , law and economics , poverty , access to medicines , property (philosophy) , political science , law , business , medicine , sociology , philosophy , epistemology
We would like to thank Richard Stallman [1] for emphasizing the distinction between intellectual property law and patent law, which was not fully elucidated in our article (“How Do Intellectual Property Law and International Trade Agreements Affect Access to Antiretroviral Therapy?”) [2]. However, we don't feel that this distinction detracts from our overall argument that restrictions placed on medicines in the name of protecting “intellectual property” hurt efforts to expand access to essential medicines throughout the world. It is not so much the specific distinctions between patenting and intellectual property that interest us, but general acceptance of the principle that life-saving medicines can be “owned” and kept from those most afflicted by disease—often living in poverty—based on this concept of ownership.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom