摘要：Whether in the World Trade Organization or through local courts, the pharmaceutical industry's fighting against compulsory licensing is not working. The potential benefits for countries issuing and enforcing compulsory licenses far outweigh the potential risks for these countries. Though a number of strategies to mitigate the threat or potential damage of compulsory licensing have been explored by various pharmaceutical companies, perhaps the most successful strategy is the "voluntary licensing" model, most famously employed by Gilead Pharmaceuticals in India. By preemptively and voluntarily licensing brand name drugs, the licensor is better able to control the terms of the licensing agreement,and the scope of the market for which the licensees' products can reach, while creating additional, low risk sources of revenue. Perhaps most importantly, the voluntary licensing model promotes cooperation between native generic manufactures and international parties wishing to protect their intellectual property rights, while promoting goodwill through better access to medicine, a hot-button issue recently of great concern to governments, citizens, and media. To ignore voluntary licensing as a strategy against compulsory licensing is to ignore one's responsibility as legal counsel to a company concerned about intellectual property rights subject to compulsory licenses.
