4 ms·

Eminent Domain is for securing land, not seizing property. Even so, the federal government has to pay a fair market price whenever eminent domain is used, which

Eminent Domain is for securing land, not seizing property. Even so, the federal government has to pay a fair market price whenever eminent domain is used, which in this case would be a very large number that taxpayers wouldn't be happy to pay, because what comes after that? Does the government start a manufacturing business? The patents are already expired, so there isn't very much to seize.

virtuabhi 10y ago
Actually, its very easy. Government makes a list of life saving drugs. Then sets a maximum price on the drugs in the list. If a monopoly refuses to comply, the government calls for yearly bids from companies around the world (including generic drug makers from India). These companies fill the supply gap and in the meantime capitalism works and a local company steps in. There is no rocket science in manufacturing these drugs and pens - trivial once you have the recipe. And countries, which put people before corporations, actually do this.
- nickff 10y ago
  Setting a maximum price does not allow the government to take the patent away. The companies could simply refuse to comply, and the government would either effectively ban the drug or be forced to buy the patent/license at a fair market price.
  - douche 10y ago
    All they have to do is write the law that says they can.
    - nickff 10y ago
      There is a Supreme Court decision that says confiscation of a patent is a constitutional taking, so they would actually have to change the constitution.
      - danielweber 10y ago
        Curse the law of law!!
  - 1024core 10y ago
    The government has more than enough in its arsenal to force these companies to comply. cf Joseph Nacchio and QWest Communications. It knows how to play dirty and kneecap someone.
refurb 10y ago
That already exists in the US. Any drug created with the use of federal money gives the gov't "march in rights" where they can seize the patent if they feel that the company is preventing access to patients. A senator attempted to do this a few months back and the NIH declined to use such rights.[1] [1] http://www.patentdocs.org/2016/04/members-of-congress-seek-nih-hearing-on-use-of-march-in-rights.html http://www.patentdocs.org/2016/04/members-of-congress-seek-n...

virtuabhi 10y ago

Actually, its very easy. Government makes a list of life saving drugs. Then sets a maximum price on the drugs in the list. If a monopoly refuses to comply, the government calls for yearly bids from companies around the world (including generic drug makers from India). These companies fill the supply gap and in the meantime capitalism works and a local company steps in. There is no rocket science in manufacturing these drugs and pens - trivial once you have the recipe. And countries, which put people before corporations, actually do this.

nickff 10y ago
Setting a maximum price does not allow the government to take the patent away. The companies could simply refuse to comply, and the government would either effectively ban the drug or be forced to buy the patent/license at a fair market price.
- douche 10y ago
  All they have to do is write the law that says they can.
  - nickff 10y ago
    There is a Supreme Court decision that says confiscation of a patent is a constitutional taking, so they would actually have to change the constitution.
    - danielweber 10y ago
      Curse the law of law!!
- 1024core 10y ago
  The government has more than enough in its arsenal to force these companies to comply. cf Joseph Nacchio and QWest Communications. It knows how to play dirty and kneecap someone.

refurb 10y ago

That already exists in the US. Any drug created with the use of federal money gives the gov't "march in rights" where they can seize the patent if they feel that the company is preventing access to patients. A senator attempted to do this a few months back and the NIH declined to use such rights.[1] [1] http://www.patentdocs.org/2016/04/members-of-congress-seek-nih-hearing-on-use-of-march-in-rights.html http://www.patentdocs.org/2016/04/members-of-congress-seek-n...