3 ms·

Technically drugs have the same patent lifespan (3 years, 2 year extension for testing/R&D). Sadly there are ways to game the system (only patenting part of the

Technically drugs have the same patent lifespan (3 years, 2 year extension for testing/R&D). Sadly there are ways to game the system (only patenting part of the molecule, part of the process, part of the anything) and then continually keeping the hold for years and years on specific drugs. The same would happen in software. They'd write all the software, patent a part of it, and then repatend a different part of the software as time went on. If anyone else attempted to patent an unpatented part they claim they invented it first and will be awarded the patent (because it is their patent). If anyone uses an unpatented part they just file for the patent and sue when they're awarded it. What's broken isn't the lifespan, it's the patent system.

beached_whale 10y ago
The US went first-to-file in 2011 for those that live or do business there. And in software, it would be trivial to determine the other parts.
- gravypod 10y ago
  It seems like the exact date was March 16, 2013 and if so then I stand corrected on that part. I thought FtF applied to any part of the invention. So you patent a specific part of the invention, then you've filed that invention. I could be wrong. IANAL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_to_file_and_first_to_invent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_to_file_and_first_to_inv...
  - beached_whale 10y ago
    Sorry yes, they signed it in 2011 but it went into effect in 2013
pkaye 10y ago
If the unpatented part is put into production by the original inventor, can they still patent it many years later?
- srtjstjsj 10y ago
  No, they can't. gravypod's explanation is not how patents work.
- mark-r 10y ago
  Don't know if things have changed recently, but last time I was involved you'd have a year after going into production to apply for the patent. Miss that deadline, kiss your patent goodbye.
sbierwagen 10y ago
Technically drugs have the same patent lifespan (3 years You might be thinking of New Clinical Investigation Exclusivity, which is 3 years, and is an entirely different thing. https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/ucm079031.htm https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/ucm0790... Drug patents last 20 years, same as any other patent. The patent expiration tricks you describe don't... exist? (You do have to patent the entire molecule.) Pfizer made a hojillion dollars from Vigara. Its patent expired in 2012, and it's now a generic. "From 1996 to 2012 under the trade name Lipitor, atorvastatin became the world's best-selling drug to that point, with more than US$125 billion in sales". Lipitor is a generic now, and is dirt cheap. If Pfizer could have keep Lipitor under patent, by any means at all, they would have! Drug companies make sequel compounds, sure, and market the heck out of them. But you don't have to buy them if you don't want to. The old drugs still exist. Your description of software patents is equally strange. You know patent examiners don't actually look at code, right? The process, or "apparatus" is described, and they award the patent based on that. You can rewrite the implementation all you want, as long as it's doing the same thing, it's covered by the same patent. You have do something different to get a different patent. What counts as "different" has, of course, been a topic of heated argument for the last two centuries.
- greeneggs 10y ago
  > "From 1996 to 2012 under the trade name Lipitor, atorvastatin became the world's best-selling drug to that point, with more than US$125 billion in sales" Also note that 1996 to 2012 is not 20 years. Drug trials eat up the patent time. This is problematic for some diseases, e.g., for cancer, where ideally you might prefer early-stage interventions or cures, but late-stage trials are faster to conclude and therefore can give drugs with longer patent protection.
- mark-r 10y ago
  Sometimes the drug companies will use tricks like finding some side effect in their current drug that makes it difficult/impossible for a generic version to get approved. But no worries, they've already invented and patented a replacement!
pacaro 10y ago
This is why the drug companies love biologics so much. The patent can expire, but without access to the cell line that produces the drug, it can't be relocated. An equivalent cell line would have to go through clinical trials. Humira is out of patent protection, but still costs thousands for a dose
gst 10y ago
> If anyone else attempted to patent an unpatented part they claim they invented it first and will be awarded the patent (because it is their patent). If anyone uses an unpatented part they just file for the patent and sue when they're awarded it. Wouldn't the one-year rule apply in those cases, preventing the original inventor (or anyone else) from filing for a patent for something that has been public knowledge for more than a year?

beached_whale 10y ago

The US went first-to-file in 2011 for those that live or do business there. And in software, it would be trivial to determine the other parts.

gravypod 10y ago
It seems like the exact date was March 16, 2013 and if so then I stand corrected on that part. I thought FtF applied to any part of the invention. So you patent a specific part of the invention, then you've filed that invention. I could be wrong. IANAL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_to_file_and_first_to_invent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_to_file_and_first_to_inv...
- beached_whale 10y ago
  Sorry yes, they signed it in 2011 but it went into effect in 2013

pkaye 10y ago

If the unpatented part is put into production by the original inventor, can they still patent it many years later?

srtjstjsj 10y ago
No, they can't. gravypod's explanation is not how patents work.
mark-r 10y ago
Don't know if things have changed recently, but last time I was involved you'd have a year after going into production to apply for the patent. Miss that deadline, kiss your patent goodbye.

sbierwagen 10y ago

Technically drugs have the same patent lifespan (3 years You might be thinking of New Clinical Investigation Exclusivity, which is 3 years, and is an entirely different thing. https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/ucm079031.htm https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/ucm0790... Drug patents last 20 years, same as any other patent. The patent expiration tricks you describe don't... exist? (You do have to patent the entire molecule.) Pfizer made a hojillion dollars from Vigara. Its patent expired in 2012, and it's now a generic. "From 1996 to 2012 under the trade name Lipitor, atorvastatin became the world's best-selling drug to that point, with more than US$125 billion in sales". Lipitor is a generic now, and is dirt cheap. If Pfizer could have keep Lipitor under patent, by any means at all, they would have! Drug companies make sequel compounds, sure, and market the heck out of them. But you don't have to buy them if you don't want to. The old drugs still exist. Your description of software patents is equally strange. You know patent examiners don't actually look at code, right? The process, or "apparatus" is described, and they award the patent based on that. You can rewrite the implementation all you want, as long as it's doing the same thing, it's covered by the same patent. You have do something different to get a different patent. What counts as "different" has, of course, been a topic of heated argument for the last two centuries.

greeneggs 10y ago
> "From 1996 to 2012 under the trade name Lipitor, atorvastatin became the world's best-selling drug to that point, with more than US$125 billion in sales" Also note that 1996 to 2012 is not 20 years. Drug trials eat up the patent time. This is problematic for some diseases, e.g., for cancer, where ideally you might prefer early-stage interventions or cures, but late-stage trials are faster to conclude and therefore can give drugs with longer patent protection.
mark-r 10y ago
Sometimes the drug companies will use tricks like finding some side effect in their current drug that makes it difficult/impossible for a generic version to get approved. But no worries, they've already invented and patented a replacement!

pacaro 10y ago

This is why the drug companies love biologics so much. The patent can expire, but without access to the cell line that produces the drug, it can't be relocated. An equivalent cell line would have to go through clinical trials. Humira is out of patent protection, but still costs thousands for a dose

gst 10y ago

> If anyone else attempted to patent an unpatented part they claim they invented it first and will be awarded the patent (because it is their patent). If anyone uses an unpatented part they just file for the patent and sue when they're awarded it. Wouldn't the one-year rule apply in those cases, preventing the original inventor (or anyone else) from filing for a patent for something that has been public knowledge for more than a year?