4 ms·
>How can any article about this issue not mention the word "patent" anywhere? Because there is no patent here. That is why.
by pravda 10y ago
>How can any article about this issue not mention the word "patent" anywhere?
Because there is no patent here. That is why.
- bradleyjg 10y agoPatents do play a role here, though not the largest role. Both Teva Pharmaceuticals and Sandoz were sued when for patent infringement when they announced plans to introduce competitors to Epipen. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-04-26/mylan-pfizer-announce-epinephrine-pen-settlement-with-teva-1- https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-04-26/mylan-pfi... [2] http://www.law360.com/articles/181459/king-pharma-sues-sandoz-over-generic-epipen http://www.law360.com/articles/181459/king-pharma-sues-sando...
- vonmoltke 10y agoThey were, if I understand the background correctly, trying to make a workalike competitor, which King/Mylan asserts they cannot do without violating a patent on the current EpiPen injector. The only thing stopping them from making a non-workalike is getting doctors to prescribe it instead of EpiPen, since pharmacies can't autosubstitute in that case.
- shanacarp 10y agoWhy does workalike matter?
- vonmoltke 10y agoThe various auto injectors work slightly differently. Rightly or wrongly the FDA expects doctors to instruct their patients in the specific auto injector they prescribe. This prevents pharmacies from subbing out other brands unless they are functionally identical.