4 ms·
What's really needed is for there to be only one patent allowed per compound approved as a pharmaceutical. It would be better if there were no additional paten
by fuzzfactor 4y ago
What's really needed is for there to be only one patent allowed per compound approved as a pharmaceutical.
It would be better if there were no additional patents on expanded scope of treatments or alternative dosage forms.
So the patent covering using the compound for treatment always expires at the soonest possible time after filing, and the most predictable time.
And allow only one additional patent per innovative technique of manufacturing the compound.
Having hundreds of patents to encumber a single compound for excessive decades is dystopian in shkreli-ish proportions.
- refurb 4y agoLimiting it to one patent sounds like a great way for companies to just abandon development. Why would you spend hundreds of millions on clinical trials if you can't recoup the cost?
- fuzzfactor 4y agoPharma already recoups the cost before the first patent expires. And long ago abandoned development when this criteria is not likely to be met.
- refurb 4y agoYou’re ignoring the drugs that never come to market because costs can’t be recouped. And no, many drugs never recoup costs before the patent runs out. Even the ones that make it to market.