A/70/279 not they were accessed subject to prior and informed consent requirements, and used in accordance with mutually agreed terms for the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising therefrom. 85. Anti-trust competition laws may be used to impose limits on patents, for example, prohibiting patent holders from refusing to grant licenses without justification, forbidding the originator firm from buying out the generic manufacturers, or impeding firms’ attempts to force patients to switch from a drug whose patent is about to expire to a newly patented drug. 86. Research institutes and universities have developed guidance tools to ensure that their licencing approaches are compatible with their primary mission to develop technology for the benefit of society. The Global Access Licensing Framework, developed by the Universities Allied for Essential Medicines, for example, can be used by producers and holders of intellectual property to develop policies allowing equitable access to their technologies, regardless of income. 30 Another tool developed by Stanford University, United States, recommends that universities, inter alia, reserve the right to practice licensed inventions and allow other non -profit and governmental organizations to do so; structure exclusive licenses in a manner that encourages technology development and use; ensure broad access to research tools and consider including provisions in licences that address unmet needs such as those of neglected patient populations or geographic areas. 31 VI. Conclusions and recommendations The Special Rapporteur makes the following conclusions and recommendations: 87. A model of access to technology based on individual ability to pay is rational and legitimate from a purely commercial perspective. From a human rights perspective, however, deprivations through patent exclusivity may be deemed as arbitrary, discriminatory or disproportionate, depending on the extent to which human rights interests are implicated by the specific technologies at stake, and the degree to which patent exclusivity, rather than production costs, create the high prices. 88. The human rights perspective focuses attention on important themes that may get lost when patents are treated primarily in terms of trade, as currently under the TRIPS Agreement: the social function and human dimension of intellectual property, the public interests at stake, the importance of transparency and public participation in policymaking, the need to design patent and alternative incentive regimes to promote research, creativity and innovation, the importance of broad diffusion of technological advances and scientific freedom, the importance of not-for-profit scientific production and innovation, and the special consideration for the impact of patent regimes upon marginalized and vulnerable groups. 89. The obligations of States under intellectual property treaties must not jeopardize the implementation of their obligations under human rights treaties. __________________ 30 31 15-12543 Available from http://uaem.org/global-access-licensing-framework/. See “In the public interest: nine points to consider in licensing university technology”, March 2007; available from www.autm.net/Nine_Points_to_Consider1.htm. 21/26