Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Do Pharmaceutical Patents Do More Harm Than Good?
By Ikenna C. Ejimonyeugwo
Pharmaceutical patents are the backbone of the modern pharmaceutical industry. They allow drug developers to possess exclusive rights in their inventions for a limited period of time. That exclusivity drives innovation and is critically important to a pharmaceutical company’s return on investment.
Developing a new drug is risky and costly, with recent estimates ranging from $314 million to $2.8 billion. With so much at stake, it is imperative for pharmaceutical companies to secure patents on their drug products to prevent competitors from copying or selling them without permission. A patent safeguards a company’s goal of recouping substantial costs associated with the research, development, and clinical trials of new drugs.
Despite the obvious benefits of pharmaceutical patents, they are also a source of contentious debate concerning issues of unaffordable drug pricing, accessibility to medication, and unfair competition. Many argue that pharmaceutical patents cause more harm than good. For example, given that a patent effectively grants a monopoly over a drug for the life of the patent, patent owners may charge higher prices to secure higher profit, knowing a competing drug or generic version is unable to enter the market during that time. This can be problematic if it causes life-saving medications to become unaffordable.
This article discusses how a pharmaceutical patent works, its role in drug development, and the polarizing impact it has on global health care.
This premium content is locked for The Intellectual Property Strategist subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.