The case "GlaxoSmithKline and AIDS Drugs in South Africa (A)" delves into a pressing global health crisis set against the backdrop of a contentious intellectual property debate in the late 1990s and early 2000s. With South Africa grappling with one of the world's most severe HIV/AIDS epidemics, the demand for antiretroviral drugs, crucial in managing the disease, had never been higher. Yet, these life-saving drugs remained inaccessible to many due to their prohibitive costs.

At the center of this dilemma was GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), one of the world's leading pharmaceutical giants, which held patents on several of these vital medications. The case unveils the multifaceted challenges GSK faced from international pressure, including from activists and non-governmental organizations urging for more affordable drugs, to its own corporate interests and responsibilities to shareholders.

The scenario is a melting pot of ethical, economic, and political considerations. It prompts discussions on the responsibilities of multinational corporations in addressing global health crises, the balance between intellectual property rights and humanitarian needs, and the complexities of operating in a globalized world with stark disparities in healthcare access and affordability.

What is a stakeholder? List 3 main stakeholders in the GlaxoSmithKline case and identify what each of their interests were in the case. Can these interests be balanced based on the case? If so, how? (10 marks)