Jennifer Ellen Mattson
University of California at Berkeley / CPTech
April 20th, 2005
Menem's First Administration: 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Menem's Second Administration: 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
During the first Administration of Argentine President Carlos Saul Menem, the US applied pressure to officials in the Argentine government to pass a patent law for pharmaceuticals. At the time, Argentina was plagued by enormous sums of foreign debt accrued during the 1980s and severe bouts of hyperinflation. Because the process and composition of pharmaceuticals have historically been considered a public good in Argentina, they were not eligible for patents. This lack of patent protection facilitated the success of a large Argentine non-research-based pharmaceutical industry that copied and produced foreign drugs to the dismay of the research-based multinational drug industry, which insisted upon compensation for its research and development of new drugs.
August 10th, 1989
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Progress Stalls on Pharmaceutical Registration Reform," Cable 1614 to the US Secretary of State, February 1990.
September 1989
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, Cable 3101 to the US Secretary of State, March 1990.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Progress Stalls on Pharmaceutical Registration Reform," Cable 1614 to the US Secretary of State, February 1990.
December 11th, 1989
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Progress Stalls on Pharmaceutical Registration Reform," Cable 1614 to the US Secretary of State, February 1990.
December 18th, 1989
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Progress Stalls on Pharmaceutical Registration Reform," Cable 1614 to the US Secretary of State, February 1990.
December 1989
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "New Secretary of Industry and Foreign Trade: Towards a More Open Economy," Cable 0584 to the US Secretary of State, DC, January 1990.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Pharmaceutical Industry Adjustment and Implications for Patent Issue," Cable 0092 to the US Secretary of State, January 1990.
According to a source from the multinational pharmaceutical industry who met with the Embassy's economic counselor, the agreement involved a 25% increase in the price of prescription drugs and a 24% savings on suppliers' credits for pharmaceutical companies. Earlier, the Argentine government had mandated that pharmaceutical companies give pharmacies interest-free credits for up to 18 days; the new agreement allows firms to charge market interest rates for these loans. The Argentine government also agrees to a 125% increase in the pharmodollar, the exchange rate for pharmaceuticals, which will be maintained until January 21st, 1990. The same industry source expressed satisfaction with the agreement, but predicted that all drug prices would reach the price ceiling, "despite the low cost of production for the large majority of these products" because of uncertainty created by the price control system.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Pharmaceutical Industry Adjustment and Implications for Patent Issue," Cable 0092 to the US Secretary of State, January 1990.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Pharmaceutical Industry Adjustment and Implications for Patent Issue," Cable 0092 to the US Secretary of State, January 1990.
On the structural adjustment side, pharmaceutical price and exchange rate controls in the midst of a rapid rise in the dollar (A650 to A1550) and surging inflation caused local producers in mid-December to cut off the supply of drugs to the local market. This action got the GOA's attention and led to the approval of sizzable (sic) price increases for prescription drugs. The GOA also took the opportunity to eliminate a market distorting forced loan requirement. However, by early January price disorientation caused pharmacies to again close. This time the root of the problem shifted to the retail level, and the government threatened to apply the anti-hording law. The closure of the pharmacies and access to drug has become a significant social issue, drawing considerable media attention. The willingness of national labs to cut off the supply of drugs to the local market in mid-December flies in the face of their argument that the absence of patent protection allows them to ensure Argentine consumers a constant supply of medicine.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Pharmaceutical Industry Adjustment and Implications for Patent Issue," Cable 0092 to the US Secretary of State, January 1990.
January 10th, 1990
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "New Secretary of Industry and Foreign Trade: Towards a More Open Economy," Cable 0584 to the US Secretary of State, January 1990.
January 12th, 1990
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "New Secretary of Industry and Foreign Trade: Towards a More Open Economy," Cable 0584 to the US Secretary of State, January 1990.
Mid-February, 1990
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Progress Stalls on Pharmaceutical Registration Reform," Cable 1614 to the US Secretary of State, February 1990.
The local head of a major US pharmaceutical said that foreign labs had noticed some improvement, but that foreign labs had registration applications that still had not moved. He claimed that this was not due to discrimination, but only to the need to payoff Secretary Menendez to have products registered. Other than Menendez, he had no idea how high or deep such payoffs went.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Progress Stalls on Pharmaceutical Registration Reform," Cable 1614 to the US Secretary of State, February 1990.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Progress Stalls on Pharmaceutical Registration Reform," Cable 1614 to the US Secretary of State, February 1990.
March 23rd, 1990
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Ambassador, Cavallo Review Bilateral Issues," Cable 3101 to the US Secretary of State, March 1990.
May 11th, 1990
Dominguez emphasized that his labs were interested in making contact with labs of similar size in the states. He thought such American labs were dynamic and doing research that some of his membership might be able to hook into. His membership did not have the capital to do primary research, but some were capable of doing investigations into additional uses for already discovered molecules. He also pointed out that the laws regulating research and testing in Argentina were much more flexible than in the US, providing US firms with the possibility to complete tests more quickly than might be done in the states. He also pointed out that the Argentine labs have capable scientists willing to work at much lower costs.Ambassador Todman concludes from his meeting with Dominguez that incentives for small Argentine labs to support patent legislation may provide a route for US influence on Government considerations. He comments in his cable to Secretary Baker:
We are encouraged that the GOA may be gearing up to move on a patent law. While the general direction is favorable, we take Dominguez's warning seriously that CILFA still has not given up its opposition. This leaves us concerned about the contents of such a law. We still need to build allies among the national labs, and COOPERALA provides such an opportunity. At this point the PMA should be encouraged to look for some potential carrots so that we can use them to show the GOA and the local labs there can be tangible, near-term benefits from the adoption of product patent protection. It would be most useful if the PMA could provide use with contacts among its smaller members who would be interested in hearing out COOPERALA about what such labs could offer the Americans in cooperative arrangements once a strong product patent protection law is in place in Argentina. It would also be useful to include such members in the PMA delegation to visit Argentina.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "National Labs Prepare for Patent Law Change," Cable 4964 to the US Secretary of State, May 1990.
May 12th, 1990
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "National Labs Prepare for Patent Law Change," Cable 4964 to the US Secretary of State, May 1990.
June 8th, 1990
See US Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Proposed Schedule for the Visit of Ambassador Hills to Buenos Aires," Cable 5012 to the US Secretary of State, May 1990.
Minister of Health and Social Action Eduardo Bauza will later (August 9th, 1990) tell the Clarin, a Buenos Aires daily newspaper, that during her visit, Ambassador Hill threatened Argentine government officials with a tariff on all Argentine exports to the United States if no changes to Argentine patent policy have been made by September 1991. The same issue of the Clarin quotes Ambassador Hill as saying during her visit that without patent protection for pharmaceuticals, Argentina will not have access to foreign investment and no anti-protectionist agricultural agreement will be incorporated in the Uruguay Round.
See US Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Pharmaceutical Patents: Press Reports GOA Willing to Comply with US Request," Cable 8145 to the US Secretary of State, August 1990.
June 19th, 1990
Secretary Bauza tells Ambassador Todman that the Argentine cabinet has created an interagency committee on patents. In a June 1990 cable to US Secretary of State James Baker, Ambassador Todman asks for the input of Washington agencies and the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers of America in advance of a July meeting with the committee.
The cable also reports that Menendez told economic section officials in a side conversation that registrations, which she claimed had been on hold while the ministry considered reforms, would be recommenced at the end of the month. However, a comment from Ambassador Todman in the cable suggests another reason for the halting of registrations:
The registration process had been halted by Bauza after the Ambassador raised the issue of corruption in the registration process with both Foreign Minister Domingo Cavallo and Bauza in separate meetings.
See American Embassy, "Pharmaceutical Discussion with Minister of Health," Cable 6246 to the US Secretary of State, June 1990.
Note: The Embassy's concerns about possible corruption stem from a mid-February discussion with an industry executive who reported that increasing the speed of the registration process required paying a bribe to Secretary Menendez.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Progress Stalls on Pharmaceutical Registration," Cable 1614 to the US Secretary of State, February 1990.
During the June 19th meeting, Menendez also promises Embassy officials that the Ministry will "issue the new lists requested by the Embassy and local members of the PMA."
Ambassador Todman's comments on the meeting in his cable to Secretary Baker demonstrate optimism in his ability to persuade Bauza of the need for patent recognition and call for industry leadership in the continued drive to "convert" Bauza and other lobbying efforts:
While the meeting seemed to start with the Minister looking for ways to modify the GOA's promise on patent, by the end he was discussing ways to sell the issue to patent opponents. Nevertheless, the conversion of Minister Bauza is far from complete. We will be looking forward to a persuasive and concise reply form the PMA on prices and other benefits for Argentina to keep the ball rolling with the Minister as well as for use on Congressmen, the press, and in the GOA interagency committee.
See American Embassy, "Pharmaceutical Discussion with Minister of Health," Cable 6246 to the US Secretary of State, June 1990.
June 20th, 1990
See American Embassy, "Pharmaceutical Discussion with Minister of Health," Cable 6246 to the US Secretary of State, June 1990.
August 3rd, 1990
Ambassador Todman complains in an August, 1990 cable to US Secretary of State James Baker that foreign labs continue to delay their public response to anti-patent arguments by CILFA, the association of large local labs, in the Argentine press:
We remain concerned that that the foreign labs continue to delay the presentation of their case for patents to the Argentine public. The foreign labs had been talking for the last two months about running ads against the anti-patent press campaign but the further delay of 30-60 days has left the public and Congress with little but the CILFA propaganda to consider. We need more than moral support and promises from the PMA if we are to ensure a satisfactory resolution to the patent issue in Argentina.
See US Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Pharmaceutical Issue," Cable 8143 to the US Secretary of State, August 1990.
August, 1990
The Clarin report includes a statement by Minister of Health Eduardo Bauza that in July, US Trade Representative Carla Hill had threatened that a lack of progress in pharmaceutical patents by September 1991 would result in a import tariff surcharge on all Argentine exports to the United States. The article quotes Ambassador Hill as saying that without patents, Argentina would face a decreased supply of foreign investment and a removal of the discussion of anti-protectionist agricultural agreement in the GATT from the realm of possibility.
See US Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Pharmaceutical Patents: Press Reports GOA Willing to Comply with US Request," Cable 8145 to the US Secretary of State, August 1990.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Press Reactions to Announcement of Intended Pharmaceutical Patent Recognition," Cable 8686 to the US Secretary of State, August 1990.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Press Reactions to Announcement of Intended Pharmaceutical Patent Recognition," Cable 8686 to the US Secretary of State, August 1990.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Press Reactions to Announcement of Intended Pharmaceutical Patent Recognition," Cable 8686 to the US Secretary of State, August 1990.
September 7th, 1990
Perlusky tells the Embassy officials that he attended a recent meeting between CILFA and President Menem, who refused to reverse his decision to introduce a patent law despite CILFA's assertion that such a law would bankrupt its members. Dr. Perlusky conveyed to US officials his skepticism toward CILFA's claims of financial endangerment.
The Embassy economic counselor asks Perlusky about a recent statement by Minister Cavallo that the Argentine government is considering asking for an Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) loan to assist local labs in adapting to a patent system. Perlusky says that the government is considering making such a request, but that no specifics have been discussed with the IDB.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "First Impressions of the New Under Secretary for Health: Pharmaceutical Patents," Cable 9427 to the US Secretary of State, September 1990.
September 10th, 1990
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "First Impressions of the New Under Secretary for Health: Pharmaceutical Patents," Cable 9427 to the US Secretary of State, September 1990.
November 6th, 1990
Ambassador Todman reports in a November, 1990 cable to US Secretary of State Jim Baker:
Pritchard opened the substantive portion of the meeting by explaining the benefits that a sound patent law would bring Argentina: new investment and the gainful employment in significant research of Argentina's scientific talent. Anticipating questions on pricing, Pritchard pointed to the Italian case where pharmaceutical prices rose slower than prices overall following the enactment of a sound pharmaceutical law.Speaking for the CAEME labs, Buxhoeden said that his members were ready to work to improve Argentina's pharmaceutical industry. Among other efforts, his members would be willing collaborators in developing a program as in the past to provide medicine to the poor, who are outside the social security system. In addition the foreign labs are disposed to expand their research activities in Argentina. Lopez Pardo praised the new direction for Argentina, mentioning that a sound patent law would encourage foreign labs to expand their cooperation in research and licensing with local labs. (Comment: Several of the foreign labs report that they are already negotiating licensing agreements with CILFA members, who want to be better positioned for pharmaceutical patents. End comment.)
Menem pointed out that Argentina was working on a solution to the patent issue in compliance with the GOA's commitment to present patent legislation to the Congress by September 1991. This effort is in accord with this government's larger goal of eliminating all non-transparent processes. The presence of his three ministers, he pointed out, demonstrated his administration's serious commitment to the issue. He welcomed CAEME's willingness to participate in a program to help the poor obtain needed pharmaceuticals.
The foreign minister said that the GOA (sic) has moving forward on the issue in the context of the GATT round ______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________. He encouraged the PMA members and CAEME to deepen their dialogue with key CILFA members to head off such tactics. Minister Gonzalez added that during his short period as Minister of Health, he successfully brought the domestic and foreign labs together to agree on a change in the registration processes. He hoped the same could occur now for the patent (issue) to keep this form developing into and ideological (division) in the Congress.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Menem Receives PMA Vice Presidents," Cable 11509 to the US Secretary of State, November 1990.
November 30th, 1990
See May, Michael A., Letter to Reinhold Buxhoeveden and Alberto Irigoyen, Buenos Aires, 11 December 1990.
December 11th, 1990
See May, Michael A., Letter to Reinhold Buxhoeveden and Alberto Irigoyen, Buenos Aires, 11 December 1990.
December 14th, 1990
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Italian Pharmaceutical Patent Case Understudy in GOA," Cable 12881 to the US Secretary of State, December 1990.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "CILFA's Latest Against Patents," Cable 0388 to the US Secretary of State, Washington DC, January 1991.
February 1991
See US Secretary of State, "Responding to CILFA on Pharmaceutical Patents," Cable 40526 to the US Embassy in Buenos Aires, February 1991.
February 20th, 1991
Early March, 1991
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Further Contacts on Pharmaceuticals," Cable 01958 to the US Secretary of State, March 1991.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Further Contacts on Pharmaceuticals," Cable 01958 to the US Secretary of State, March 1991.
March 4th, 1991
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Ambassador's Call on Health and Social Action Minister Porto," Cable 2113 to the US Secretary of State, March 1991.
Mid-March, 1991
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Pharmaceutical Patents: Comments by the New GOA Ambassador to the US," Cable 02636 to the US Secretary of State, March 1991.
Powerful domestic interests oppose GOA acceptance of this property right. While there is diminished ideological support for the pirates' position, the issue could be exploited in a demagogic anti-American manner. The downside for the US would be not only less than acceptable IPR protection but an important setback to the overall relationship.Although he recognizes Ambassador Hills has authority over the Special 301 list, Ambassador Todman asks that "the Embassy (and the Department) be notified, in advance, when possible by cable, of any high level approaches and be given an opportunity to provide our view on what tactics will work best."
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Pharmaceutical Patents in Argentina," Cable 02732 to the US Secretary of State, March 1991.
March 25th, 1991
See US Embassy, Buenos Aires, "CODEL Bradley Meeting with Argentine Foreign Minister Di Tella," Cable 03077 to the US Secretary of State, April 1991.
March 26th, 1991
Ambassador Todman reports in an April 1991 cable to US Secretary of State Jim Baker:
In response to Senator Bradley's question on the possibilities of favorable legislative action to pass an intellectual property right bill, Menem stated this would not be easy. He described efforts by local pharmaceutical companies to finance a media campaign against patent protection for drugs. This campaign stresses the possibility of unemployment in the local laboratories and the high prices which will result from patent protection. _____ stated the executive branch will use all of its forces to get the law passed. He fully supports these efforts and expects no problem _____________. The Chamber of Deputies, however, is another problem. _____ said he and other GOA officials hope to complete action on this legislation before Congress changes in December, since the Peronists could lose seats in the Chamber of Deputies in the September elections.Senator Bradley then outlined the US Congress's concern that "research and development costs need to be recovered in order to promote new research."
See US Embassy, Buenos Aires, "CODEL Bradley Meeting with Senator Eduardo Menem," Cable 03109 to the US Secretary of State, April 1991.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "State of Play on Patents," Cable 02947 to the US Secretary of State, April 1991.
March 27th, 1991
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Foreign Minister Seeks Special GSP Treatment in Exchange for Patent Law," Cable 2920 to the US Secretary of State, March 1991.
In an April cable to US Secretary of State James Baker, Ambassador Todman reports:
The group said they had prepared a lobbying plan, and were educating themselves on the issue to become more effective lobbyists. They are carrying out a public information campaign, and preparing additional material to counter a CILFA (patent pirate organization) media blitz, that they anticipate will take place once a bill is introduced in the Congress. The pro-patent think tank CEDIQUIFA is putting together a seminar on the issue for early June. The Ambassador encouraged them to push ahead with their publicity effort.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "State of Play on Patents," Cable 02947 to the US Secretary of State, April 1991.
April 1991
See US Secretary of State, "Argentina: Special 301 Announcement," Cable to the US Embassy in Buenos Aires, April 1991.
May 3rd, 1991
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Update on Pharmaceuticals," Cable 04306 to the US Secretary of State, May 1991.
Mid-May, 1991
See Aronson, Bernard, "Meeting with Argentine Foreign Minister Guido Di Tella," Briefing Memorandum.
May 24th, 1991
June 1991
See US Secretary of State, "Enlisting European Support for Improved IPR Protection in South America," Cable 197873 to the US Embassies in Bern, Bonn, London, Paris, Rome, and the Hague, June 1991.
July 1991
US Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Priority for IPR Administration," Cable 07046 to the US Secretary of State, July 1991.
August 6th, 1991
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, Cable to the US Secretary of State, August 1991.
Late August 1991
With the deadline for the GOA's introduction of a new patent law less than a month away, the local association of pharmaceutical patent pirates (CILFA) seems to have stepped up its campaign to ensure the new law will provide only minimal rights. Continuing to equate patents with monopoly rights in its newspaper and television advertisements, CILFA is hammering (sic) way with its claims that patents will greatly increase the price of pharmaceuticals to pensioners. The ads draw a picture of pensioners without vital medicine and a picture of the public health care system losing up to a USD billion a year. CILFA continues to preach that any new law must contain strong compulsory licensing provisions.The CILFA campaign has successfully generated some public political support as the September 8th elections near. The radical party recently issued a public statement against patents. In addition the Health Minister for Buenos Aires Province, Gonzalez Garcia, was reported to have told a pharmaceutical convention that Argentina "cannot recognize medical patents on the terms requested by the developed world" which would force its people to pay "outrageous" prices for medical products.
The local PMA representatives (CAEME) have so far been working behind the scenes in trying to undo the CILFA successes. When CAEME's lobbyist on patents questioned the head of the radical block in the House about his party's public position, the Deputy claimed not to be aware of the reasons his party had taken such a stand. The lobbyist has taken this response to mean that the (sic) radically commitment could be reversed.
Nevertheless, the local PMA representatives (CAEME) have been slow to organize against CILFA's stepped up public campaign. CAEME has promised ECONOFF that a newspaper and television counteroffensive is being prepared. CAEME hopes to have its rebuttal to the public by the first week of September. Meanwhile, the GOA's Minister of Health Porto told an August 26 conference on the economic plan that he would soon be sending a draft of a new bill to the President's office for approval, before forwarding it to the Congress.
Comment: The Embassy is concerned that CAEME continues to be slow off the mark in confronting CILFA's anti-patent publicity campaign. In the past CAEME has been reluctant to publicly refute CILFA's claims on the price effects of patents, despite significant data that could be used in this regard. A concise treatment on prices and the willingness of the R and D based industry to sign licensing agreements after the Chilean and especially the Mexican laws were passed, would go a long way towards knocking the philosophical legs out form under the anti-patent campaign.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Anti-Patent Campaign Heats Up," Cable 08429 to the US Secretary of State, August 1991.
August 28th, 1991
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patents: Foreign Minister Publicizes Potential 301 Retaliation," Cable 08523 to the US Secretary of State, August 1991.
September 10th, 1991
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patent Talks," Cable 09218 to the US Secretary of State, September 1991.
September 21st-26th, 1991
Presidential Chief of Staff Eduardo Bauza is quoted in Pagina 12 September 24th as saying that the Ambassador was entitled to his opinions, but did not have the right to interfere in Argentine domestic affairs.
La Nacion political correspondent Angel Anaya accuses Ambassador Todman of overstepping his duties and earning the nickname "Braden II" given to him by Argentine government officials in an editorial published September 26th. The nickname refers to US Ambassador Spruille Braden, who was outspoken in his opposition to Argentina's Peronist government.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "CILFA Aims Low to Halt Patent Law," Cable to the US Secretary of State, October 1991. (Cable number is illegible.)
CILFA continued to keep the pressure on the Ambassador and the GOA by promoting ( according to the Buenos Aires daily "Clarin") a resolution in the National Chamber of Deputies urging the GOA to declare Ambassador Todman "persona non grata" for interference in Argentine domestic affairs. The Peronist house leadership managed late September 26th to remit the legislation to a death-in-committee, but not until 76 legislators had gone on record in favor of it.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "CILFA Aims Low to Halt Patent Law," Cable to the US Secretary of State, October 1991. (Cable number is illegible.)
September 27th, 1991
In a private meeting with Ambassador Todman, President Menem clarifies that he does not consider the Ambassador's efforts as an intrusion into domestic Argentine affairs.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "CILFA Aims Low to Halt Patent Law," Cable to the US Secretary of State, October 1991. (Cable number is illegible.)
October 2nd, 1991
The article also reports that the Argentine government is considering a bill to require prescriptions to be written by the scientific name as opposed to the brand name in order to increase competition within the generic industry.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Press Reports Ministerial Decision on Patent Bill," Cable 09808 to the US Secretary of State, Washington DC, October 1991.
October 4th, 1991
October 10th, 1991
Ambassador Todman comments in his October 1991 cable to the US Secretary of State:
Embassy's preliminary, inexpert reading is that law as submitted is responsive to most US major concerns. This is only the first step and congressional approval will not be easy. Close associate of Minister Cavallo told DCM October 10th that Cavallo had said that the "guns of Navarone" will be needed to get the bill through Congress.
December 1991
See US Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Congressional Debate on Patents and Patent Office Problems," Cable 12261 to the US Secretary of State, December 1991
Pablo Challu, "The Consequences of Pharmaceutical Product Patenting" Off-Prints of World Competition, December 1991.
December 10th, 1991
December 27th, 1991
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Technical Assistance for GOA Patent Office," Cable 12984 to the US Secretary of State, December 1991.
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "GOA Request for Technical Assistance for New Patent Office," Cable 00838 to the US Secretary of State, January 1992.
January 23rd, 1992
Carlos Villagra, secretary general of a major pharmacy industry group, says that with such a decree on generics, his organization will support pharmaceutical patents.
CILFA and CAEME both oppose the order: as Embassy officer James M. Derham notes in a February 1992 cable to the US Secretary of State, "the marketing investments of both groups have long been directed at convincing doctors to prescribe their products."
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "GOA Decree on Generic Drug Prescriptions," Cable 01363 to the US Secretary of State, February 1992.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "GOA Decree on Generic Drug Prescriptions," Cable 01363 to the US Secretary of State, February 1992.
February 6th, 1992
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Congress Set for February 17 Special Session; Patents Law Expected to be Considered," Cable 01306 to the US Secretary of State, February 1992.
February 10th, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "GOA Decree on Generic Drug Prescriptions," Cable 01363 to the US Secretary of State, February 1992.
Mid to Late February, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Request for Assistance in Arranging Argentine Deputies' IPR visit to Washington," Cable 01544 to the US Secretary of State, February 1992.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Expansion of GOA Deputies' IPR visit to Washington," Cable 01970 to the US Secretary of State, February 1992.
February 27th, 1992
March 6th, 1992
See US Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Top GOA Administration Offices Commit to Push for Passage of Patent Bill," Cable 02583 to the US Secretary of State, Washington, March 1992.
March 9th, 1992
See US Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Top GOA Administration Offices Commit to Push for Passage of Patent Bill," Cable 02583 to the US Secretary of State, Washington, March 1992.
Mid- March, 1992
Alejandro Zaia, a lobbyist for CAEME, will join the delegation to DC.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Additional Interests of GOA Deputies," Cable 02584 to the US Secretary of State, March 1992.
March 16th, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patent Legislation and S and T Cooperation," Cable 02945 to the US Secretary of State, March 1992.
April 9th, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Cavallo Comments on Patent Law," Cable 03665 to the US Secretary of State, April 1992.
April 15th, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Legislative Strategy for Patent Bill Passage" Cable 03924 to the US Secretary of State, April 1992.
April 20th, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Generic Drug Resolution" Cable 04506 to the US Secretary of State, May 1992.
May 12th, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patent Law - Discussion with Diputado Yoma" Cable 04938 to the US Secretary of State, May 1992.
May 27th, 1992
Cavallo says the first draft of the industry committee's report on the bill is unsatisfactory, and that the passage of an acceptable bill will require lobbying from himself, other ministers, and the President. The President has the power to veto specific parts of a law, but this power is limited. Cavallo asks that the US emphasize in its discussions with other Argentine ministers that free trade agreements with the US would not be possible without intellectual property protection.
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Minister Cavallo's Comments on US-Argentine Trade Issues" Cable 05518 to the US Secretary of State, May 1992.
June 19th, 1992
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Menem Notes Need for Swift Implementation of Pending Patents Legislation" Cable 05400 to the US Secretary of State, May 1992.
Late June, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Minister of Health Pledges Support for Patent Bill" Cable 06047 to the US Secretary of State, May 1992.
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "_________ Gives His Priorities, Patents Bill is Not One of Them" Cable 06737 to the US Secretary of State, May 1992.
August 1992
As part of the Embassy's effort to maintain pressure on the GOA for passage of sound IPR legislation, the Ambassador raised the issue with Argentina's Ambassador to the United States, Carlos Ortiz the Rozas, and other senior foreign ministry officials including Secretary Petrella, Undersecretary Pfirter, Assistant Under Secretary for Mercosur Abra, and North American desk director Dalton during an August 10th meeting. In raising the question, the Ambassador noted that sound IPR protection was our number one economic issue with Argentina. He pointed out that he had discussed the topic personally with President Menem, Ministers Cavallo, Di Tella, Araoz, and Secretary General of the Presidency Bauza and others in the executive branch. However, he was abstaining form personally lobbying Congress, because of the sensitivities shown by that body. Beyond patents, he said, it was important to have a broad scope law protecting intellectual property, since this would have an effect on the level of our cooperation in science and technology as well as on the attitudes towards investing in Argentina. The Ambassador noted that if the patent portion of the issue were not resolved soon, pressure could easily develop for another 301 action, and asked what might be done.Ambassador Ortiz de Rozas recommended that the US enlist foreign labs from other countries to lobby for patents and to incorporate non-pharmaceutical companies interested in the broader idea of intellectual property protection.Ortiz de Rozas and Undersecretary of Foreign Relations, Rogelio Pfirter, commented that the issue could be resolved only through a lobbying effort by the pharmaceutical companies. Undersecretary for economic integration Jesus Sabra noted the concern of opponents of the law that the law could lead to an increase in pharmaceutical prices.
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "IPR / Patent Effort: Discussion with Ambassador Ortiz de Rozas" Cable 08408 to the US Secretary of State, May 1992.
Early September 1992
1. Summary and Action RequestAfter 11 months of drifting, indications are that the administration's patent bill may be gaining momentum in the Chamber of Deputies. The Ambassador has continued to receive commitments of support from top officials, while ecouns and econoff have met with several groups of Congressmen in recent weeks and pressed for their support of the bill. German labs have come up with USD 69 thousand for a renewed public relations campaign. Should this momentum begin to flag due to continuing strong opposition, we would like to be in a position to note at the highest levels of the Argentine executive branch that there is a growing concern in Washington about the delay.
(THE ACTION REQUEST IS CENSORED.)
Why the bill has drifted in the Congress
2. Supporters of the Menem administration's bill have faced both procedural and political obstacles since the bill entered the Chamber of Deputies, October 10 1991. Upon arrival the bill was sent immediately to eight committees, a maneuver which senior Peronist deputies recognize was instigated by opponents to complicate the legislative process. The industry committee has the lead, with the committees for science and technology, health and commerce in a second tier of importance. While leaders in the key committees have plowed ahead, some have been influenced by the local labs' attempt to amend the bill.
Industry Committees
3. For example, the president of the industry committee Iribarne told econoff that he supports the administration's bill but is pushing for three changes, which are damaging. He wants to:
He claims to agree with a duration of 20 years, although his staffer argues for a limit of 15 years, along the lines of Chile.
- delete the article which allows importation to be considered sufficient as meeting a "working" requirement,
- replace pipeline protection with a phase-in period, and
- allow parallel importation of patented products.
4. CAEME (local association of multinational pharmaceutical firms) lobbyists explained that the committee's work on the patent bill came to a halt after administration officials told Iribarne that his changes were completely unacceptable. Iribarne's committee turned its attention to a fishing bill that has also been a difficult issue for the government. He planned to finish that work before taking up patents again.
Health Committee
5. The head of the health committee Deputy Corchuelo Blasco claims to support the administration's bill, but believes CILFA's (anti-patent association of large local firms) data on prices. Like Iribarne, Corchuelo Blasco wants a phase-in period. He also calls for freer GOA discretion in granting compulsory licenses.
Commerce Committee
6. Deputy Lopez, the head of the commerce committee, remains an indifferent supporter of the bill.
Science and Technology Committee
7. The president of the S and T committee, Deputy Nacul, actively defends the administration's bill, and suggests that patent supporters need a more concrete presentation of the benefits that IPR protection can bring Argentina. He emphasizes that "price effect" is a key issue for deputies and recommends that the research industry attempt to further substantiate in "common sense" fashion the neutral price effects of patents. He also believes it would be helpful if the research industry could demonstrate some intent to invest, once the legal climate improves.
Insufficient administration emphasis in the Congress
8. All our interlocutors agreed that top Menem administration officials had not, until recently, (sic) push hard for the bill within the Congress, despite commitments from the President on down to work for passage. Typical was (sic) Iribarne understandings that improving IPR protection is one of the administration's concerns, but he claimed not to have received word from a top official that the time had come to move the legislation.
9. The administration's new pointman on patents is undersecretary for industry Carlos Magarinos. He enjoys a direct line of communications with Cavallo on the issue that bypasses the undersecretary's more immediate superior, Secretary of Industry and Commerce Schiaretti. We have heard from both lobbyists and Deputies that Magarino's message to the Congress on behalf of Economy / Minister Cavallo is: "no amendments to the administration's bill."
Other political distractions
11. While the controversy over reforming the constitution is no longer the distraction it was for Deputies, other issues have arisen to divert their attention from work on the more arcane legislation of economic reform. The Peronist bloc leadership is under fire for its inability to deliver a united party for a vote on the Chilean border treaty. With recriminations flying, attentions turned to replacing the leadership of the bloc.
12. Meanwhile, Iribarne has been pulled out of the Congress by his political mentor, Mayor Grosso of the Federal Capital. In accepting the top post in Grosso's council, Iribarne asked for three months leave from the Congress. It now seems likely that he will be forced to give up the chairmanship of the committee. CAEME lobbyists believe that Deputy (CENSORED)
13. Finally, lethargy in the Congress is another problem for patents. Congress has lost the sense of urgency it felt in early 1991 when inflation forced a change in the economic team. After 18 months of stability, Iribarne said, his fellow deputies are no longer seized with the country's economic problems.
Reason for hope
14. Despite obstacles, there is good reason to believe success is still possible, if a renewed effort is made. From (sic) Iribarne perspective, President Menem still has a sufficient following in the Congress to get a patent bill approved. Iribarne recognized that the patent issue is not likely to produce the same emotional division among his colleagues as some of the other legislation under discussion.
15. We continue to receive very positive responses in our contacts with senior administration officials. The Ambassador is seeking out new political channels for our message as well as renewing commitments from top officials. In a recent visit to President Menem's province of La Rioja, the Ambassador pressed the issue with Governor Arnuado. (CENSORED).
16. CAEME lobbyists report that La Rioja Deputy Yoma, an in-law of Menem's and a member of the industry committee, has written a favorable report on the bill with the support of Undersecretary Magarinos. We understand that Yoma has gathered sufficient support in the committee to move his report to the floor. Yoma recently met with Menem on the issue and reportedly receive the President's support. After Yoma got bloc leader Matzkin to speak to Menem, the bloc leader reportedly told his Deputies that the party would back Yoma's report. Lobbyists believe the bloc leader is at the point of announcing that the patent bill is the next up for consideration in the Chamber.
Some helpful signs from opposition party ranks
17. Lobbyist Alonso reports that former Foreign Minister Dante Caputo favors a sound law, and haw perhaps 20 Deputies from his party willing to help form a quorum at the time of a floor vote.
Time is right to push harder.
18. With the current ordinary session nearing its end on September 30, Margarinos and local pro-patent lobbyists believe the time is right to push for passage of the bill in the Chamber of Deputies. They see support firming in the Congress with CILFA on the defensive. The association has changed its president at a time when a quality control scandal has rocked local industry.
19. In contacting the Minister of Health again on patents the Ambassador was told that the inability of a local firm to control the quality of one of its elixirs (propolio), which caused the death of more than 20 persons (Buenos Aires 8791), has improved the political environment for patents. Although the firm was not a pharmaceutical lab, the press associated it with that industry and consumer vulnerability to current practices.
20. Most of the multiple competing bills produced by CILFA supporters have attracted little support and can be brushed aside, according to lobbyists. Margarinos also thinks that the number of committees set to review can be reduced.
IDB Conditionality
21. We understand that IDB conditionality for the $350 million investment sector loan (ISL) includes requirements on intellectual property protection as part of the effort to enhance the investment environment. As funds from the ISL are to help with Brady Plan financing and much of the work of the ISL has been completed, the ISL conditionality, as it stands, includes actions which have been taken. For example, on intellectual property rights, it requires in the policy matrix that the GOA: "present to Congress patent legislation that protects pharmaceutical patents." The legislation has, of course, been presented. At an appropriate time, e.g. after the Brady Plan for Argentina is concluded, we may wish to work with the IDB to add pressure on the GOA to comply not only with the letter of the conditionality, but also with the spirit of it which is to establish adequate patent protection for pharmaceuticals so that R and D and other foreign and domestic investment in this field is not discouraged.
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Ending Patent Legislation Drift," Cable 09529 to the US Secretary of State, September 1992.
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Pirates Sponsor Deputies' Visit to Washington," Cable 10252 to the US Secretary of State, May 1992.
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Argentine Patent Law: Visit of Deputy Fescina to Washington" Cable 10002 to the US Secretary of State, May 1992.
September 17th, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Putting Patents on Agenda of the Extraordinary Session of Congress," Cable 10084 to the US Secretary of State, September 1992.
September 21st, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Talking Points for Eagleburger / Di Tella Meeting," Cable 09913 to the US Secretary of State, September 1992.
September 23rd, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Coordination with European Embassies in Support of Patent Bill," Cable 10124 to the US Secretary of State, September 1992.
September 25th, 1992
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Head of Congressional Foreign Relations Committee Offers Assistance on Patents" Cable 10227 to the US Secretary of State, September 1992.
September 27th, 1992
In his comments in the September 1992 cable, Todman says, "I and Embassy officers continue to work quietly with other embassies, members of the government, and favorably inclined legislators to try to get this issue approved quickly."
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patent Legislation," Cable 10206 to the US Secretary of State, May 1992.
Early October, 1992
US Secretary of State, Washington DC, "AU Pharmaceutical Patent Conference," Cable 344829 to the US Embassy in Buenos Aires, October 1992.
An Argentine radio report Ambassador Todman describes as "typical of the way the press is playing the results of the conference" says, in Todman's words, that "the Deputies who had attended the conference left convinced that restricted royalties payment might be acceptable, but unrestricted patents would have an adverse social impact."
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Request for Results of the AU Conference on Patents," Cable 10252 to the US Secretary of State, October 1992.
November 7th-8th, 1992
President Menem expressed confidence in the ability of Congressmen Jorge Yoma to get the bill passed.
Minister Cavallo said that he expected the bill to pass and warned that overzealous efforts on the part of the international community might backfire. He mentioned the policy conditionality of an Inter-American Development Bank Investment Sector Loan as an example of something that might provoke Congress to angrily and obstinately reject the patent legislation.
Bauza was more skeptical about the bill's prospects, but ultimately promised to push hard for the bill.
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Ambassador's Discussions with Menem, Cavallo and Bauza on the Patent Law," Cable 11945 to the US Secretary of State, November 1992.
Mid to Late November, 1992
In response to concerns about Argentina's need to improve its research and development capabilities to keep up with current military technology raised by Minister of Defense Erman Gonzalez in a meeting with General Colin Powell, the Ambassador "emphasized the need for the Argentine Congress to pass the administration' patent bill as an important step toward solving this problem."
The Ambassador also met with Minister of Health Julio Cesar Araoz to reinforce his insistence that the Ministry press for the bill's passage.
Ambassador Todman comments in a cable acting US Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger: "We will continue to seek every opportunity to press the issue with Menem administration officials." However, he points out that "the PMA needs to make an additional, much more public effort."
American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Discussion with Cabinet Members on Patents," Cable 12323 to the US Secretary of State, November 1992.
December 1992
In response to a US pharmaceutical industry petition, the United States initiated a Section 301 investigation on patent protection on September 23rd, 1988. On September 23rd, 1989, the pharmaceutical industry withdrew its petition following progress on this issue. Subsequently, Argentina revised its drug registration procedures. In addition, the government of Argentina introduced a new patent law into its Congress on October 11th, 1991 to modernize its existing 1864 patent regime. The law remains in the Argentine legislature where it is under discussion in an extraordinary session. The United States continues to pursue improved intellectual property rights protection in Argentina. Argentina has been placed on the "watch list" under the "Special 301" provision of the 1988 trade act in May 1989 and remains on that list.
US Secretary of State, Washington DC, "Revision of 1992 National Trade Estimate" Cable 402393 to the US Embassy in Buenos Aires, December 1992.
Recently, Alejandro Roemmers, a director of his family's pharmaceutical laboratory, called on the Ambassador seeking support against the GOA's rules for generic drug prescriptions. The Ambassador took the opportunity to press the director on patents, refocusing the conversation on IPR. Roemmers Laboratories is the sales leader in the Argentine market as well as the leader of the domestic Argentine pharmaceutical association fighting improvements in patent protection.Roemmer's reducing desired changes to patent bill
The Ambassador pointed out that sound IPR protection will be one of the top issues for the Clinton Administration. Acknowledging that improved patent protection was inevitable, the director argued for a ten year transition period in Argentina. He pointed out that such a period was currently part of the Dunkel text. At several points in the conversation, the director said that Argentine firms should have "some period" during which the GOA could grant compulsory licenses as part of the transition to a new regime. The director proposed that he and several other "flexible" members of CILFA talk directly with research labs to work out mutually acceptable terms for a law. (CILFA is a local laboratories' trade association.) The Ambassador emphasized the benefits of the Menem Administration's patent bill.
Roemmers preparing for the inevitable.
4. While Roemmers labs is fighting to weaken the Administration's bill, it is also preparing for passage of such a law. The director had just returned from the US, where he discussed possible joint research projects in Argentina with officials from Merck, Sharp, and Dohme as well as Glaxo. Roemmers had already arranged drug (sic) licences with Merck, Glaxo, and Bayer, and talks are underway with SmithKline Beecham. The director estimated that perhaps the top 15 of CILFA's 58 member labs were capable of attracting licensing agreements with foreign patent holders. Roemmers had also contracted Japanese labs. Roemmers had also contracted Japanese labs. However the Japanese were uninterested in licensing with an Argentine firm, preferring to give rights for the hemisphere to US labs.
5. The director was pleased with the results of his talks in the US, but concerned about the short duration of the licensing agreements being discussed. The five year terms under discussion are too short, the director complained. If labs like Roemmers are going to relinquish their free access to front line technology, the director said, longer-term relationships with patent owners are needed. The director suggested that if such agreements were to cover 20 years, this would give his firm sufficient confidence to welcome a patent system. He would like such contracts to establish local labs as the long-term representatives of foreign labs, providing stable access to a stream of new products.
Additional Twist to the Price Argument
6. The director also told the Ambassador local labs would need more freedom of pricing in their contracts. The director complained that Glaxo had insisted Roemmers sell a product at four times its production costs. At such a price, he claimed, the drug would have little sales volume in Argentina. According to the director, Glaxo officials refused to allows the retail price to be more than 15 percent lower in Argentina, because they did not want to have to explain the difference to US consumers. From Glaxo's point of view, the director claimed, the Argentine market was simply too small to allow pricing issues here to endanger margins in major markets elsewhere.
Need to restore a reputation for quality control.
7. The director recognized a need to end at least some of the local industry's free wheeling style of operation. He lamented quality control scandals that rocked local pharmaceutical producers during 1992. Despite Roemmers Labs reputation for quality, it was being hurt by poor standards at other Argentine labs. In the absence of effective GOA regulation, fly-by-night labs have won some of Roemmers' traditional hospital contracts. He reiterated rumors that such labs have sold local hospitals serum which was actually water. These stories along with that of the 22 deaths caused by a tainted elixir had spread to neighboring countries, effecting Roemmers Labs' export sales.
Comment
8. As the leader of the antipatent lobbying effort under the CILFA umbrella, Roemmers is in a strong position to influence the political battle for patent protection in Argentina. Roemmers alone has been willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars for such projects as the American University seminar to cement Congressional opposition. While we remain confident our patent protection goal with eventually be obtained, the issues of timing and the actual level of protection that will be passed remain open questions.
9. Turning leading labs like Roemmers around on the issue is a goal now obtainable. The director revealed the changes already underway in the thinking and operational planning at his firm. For instance, Roemmers labs appears to have reduced its demand for compulsory licensing, limiting it to a transition period. Clearly, it is up to PMA to decide whether to continue rejecting Roemmers' offer for direct talks on the contents of a law.
10. Perhaps a more acceptable avenue of fruitful exchange is the request for deeper contractual relations with patent owners. Since the duration of such licensing and contractual relations is outside the scope of a patent law, an accommodation between private firms on this point would not weaken the integrity of the legislation. The impression that the director conveyed is that an amicable agreement on this point could lead to a change in attitude toward the bill and a reduction in the intensity of domestic firms' opposition. Eliminating opposition to the Menem Administration's bill should be an explicit requirement of any extended agreement. This goal can only be pursued by patent holders themselves.
11. One problem is that Roemmers seems to be talking mostly with labs that already have their own reps in Argentina. Other PMA members need to be made aware of the opportunities that a new law will bring so they can consider working our representative arrangements now.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Turning Lead Pirate Labs Around on Patents," Cable 0087 to the US Secretary of State, January 1993.
February 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Explaining USG Policy on IPR," Cable 1621 to the US Secretary of State, February 1993.
Efforts by US pharmaceutical firms have been anemic, yet the pharmaceutical association, PMA, is threatening to recommend Argentina for a Special 301 case should the bill not pass.
See US Secretary of State, Washington DC, "ARA Economic Highlights (January 26-31, 1993)," Cable 37742 to All American Republic Diplomatic Posts, February 1993.
March 3rd, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Arnet, March 3, on Intellectual Property Rights," Cable 2020 to the US Secretary of State, March 1993.
March 10th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patching Together the Pro-Patent PR Campaign," Cable 2556 to the US Secretary of State, March 1993.
March 18th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patents Get Push From Deputy's Conference," Cable 2799 to the US Secretary of State, March 1993.
March 25th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patent Pirate Leader Visiting Washington," Cable 2851 to the US Secretary of State, March 1993.
April 1993
At the close of his article, Burllich states that invention is no longer as important a source of national wealth as it once was:First, it must be made clear that we are neither constrained by any international obligation nor by any moral or philosophical principle either. In a strict sense a patent is against the natural laws of the market, since it establishes a twenty-year legal monopoly for the benefits of the inventor. The declared objective is to encourage research with the incentive that profits be produced during that period of legal monopoly based on the total exclusion of competition.
Second, practically nothing is invented in Argentina. Less than 0.1% of the patents of the world originate in our country.
Consequently, we do not see the benefits of modifying the current law -- in this aspect, the main argument in favor of the sanction is that the new legislation would encourage research in our country and consequently, technological development. Really, it is not like this because nothing prevents an Argentine inventor from patenting his discovery in developed countries. Besides, the Argentine market, objectively considered, is not big enough to justify the huge expenditure on research and development that any new technology requires.
In the past, the economic victors were those who invented new products. The British of the 19th century and the Americans of the 20th century got rich that way . . . so as to obtain monopolic yields in the technologies of the processes, it was necessary to expel the competitors . . . In the present world inventing a new product is worth very little if the inventor is not the least expensive producer of that product.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Editorial against Patent Reform," Cable 3822 to the US Secretary of State, April 1993.
April 27th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "GOA Promises New Effort to Secure Passage of Patent Law," Cable 4015 to the US Secretary of State, April 1993.
May 3rd, 1993
See Nash, Nathaniel C., "US Presses Argentina on Patents," The New York Times, May 2nd, 1993.
June 6th, 1993
See Marx, Gary, "US Prods Argentina on Patents," The Chicago Tribune June 6th, 1993.
June 10th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Senate IPR Hearings: Local Labs Presentations," Cable 5748 to the US Secretary of State, June 1993.
June 11th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Senate IPR Hearings: Local Labs Presentations," Cable 5748 to the US Secretary of State, June 1993.
Mid-June, 1993
As you know, concurrently with consideration of new patent legislation by the Argentine Congress, the A.I.D. representative's office here has been trying for several months to begin the process of designing a project which would start after, repeat after, the new law is passed. A.I.D, has funds available for this design effort, and I understand PTO has informally expressed its willingness to cooperate with Argentina, subject to USTR concurrence. I am told there has been a decision not to proceed with the design of a project because it was concluded that Argentina should not be quote rewarded with assistance unquote of this type until it had complied with its commitment to pass sound patents legislation, that includes protection for pharmaceutical products.I have no doubt that there will be a new Argentine patents law. It is not a question of whether there will be a better law, but when it will be passed. I believe passage in this year is likely. Obviously, the new law by itself will be of no use until it is implemented. The GOA industrial property office is not capable at this time of implementing even the existing antiquated patent legislation and will certainly be unable to cope with the complexities of a new patent law. The GOA knows this and is anxious to cooperate with PTO. It is in our interest to see that this cooperation begins as soon as possible after new legislation is passed, but this will not happen unless project planning is done now. In addition, the initiation of planning now will signal Argentina that the prospects for collaboration with PTO are indeed real (after a new law is passed) and this signal itself will have a positive impact on deliberations regarding the new law.
Seeing that the GOA passes and implements new patents legislation has long been a top priority to which the USG has devoted great resources and effort. We should do everything possible now to ensure that the potential benefit from a new law will be realized soon after it is passed. I request that steps be taken to have this project approved urgently.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Design of Project for Cooperation Between USDOC Patents and Trademark Office (PTO) and Argentine Industrial Property Office," Cable 5960 to the US Secretary of State, June 1993.
June 17th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patent Hearings - CAEME Gives Best Shot," Cable 6042 to the US Secretary of State, June 1993.
June 28th, 1993
See "Kantor Presses Argentina for a Medical Patents Law," Buenos Aires Herald, June 29th, 1993.
Late June, 1993
July 1st, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patent Hearings Continue, with No Clear End in Sight," Cable 6600 to the US Secretary of State, July 1993.
July 29th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patents Hearings Continue, with Weight of Argument Going Against Modern Protection," Cable 7907 to the US Secretary of State, Washington, August 1993.
August 5th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patents Hearings Continue, with Weight of Argument Going Against Modern Protection," Cable 7907 to the US Secretary of State, Washington, August 1993.
August 6th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patents Hearings Continue, with Weight of Argument Going Against Modern Protection," Cable 7907 to the US Secretary of State, Washington, August 1993.
August 9th, 1993
Cannot PMA do better? Are the prices in the chart accurate? If they are, the differences amounting to hundreds and thousands of percent are strong -- and locally very persuasive -- ammunition for those fighting against passage of the patent bill.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Request for Information to Rebut Arguments of Opponents of Patent Law," Cable 7608 to the US Secretary of State, August 1993.
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Somos Article on Patents," Cable 7648 to the US Secretary of State, August 1993.
August 11th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patent Law: Ambassador Discusses with Min Econ Cavallo," Cable 7759 to the US Secretary of State, August 1993.
August 12th, 1993
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patents Hearings Continue, with Weight of Argument Going Against Modern Protection," Cable 7907 to the US Secretary of State, Washington, August 1993.
October 1993
- Alternative I - Regulatory Decree enforcing recently ratified treaties and reinterpreting the old law.
- Alternative II - Exceptional Urgency Decree with force of law
- Alternative III - Amendments of Board of Health regulations
See American Embassy, Buenos Aires, "Patents Outlook Still Uncertain," Cable 10053 to the US Secretary of State, October 1993. <