Then it works as intended, the pharma company at first enjoys a cheap patent, but gatekeeping the drug for years, until way after the r&d costs are recouped fro

Then it works as intended, the pharma company at first enjoys a cheap patent, but gatekeeping the drug for years, until way after the r&d costs are recouped from sales, becomes prohibitively expensive. If the drug doesn't sell a lot and is never profitable, then the patent gets dropped earlier to avoid sinking more costs. If the drug cures cancer and makes millions, the company can easily recoup its cost up until the upkeep is too much, at which point surely it would be better for society that the drug be open for everyone? Pharma companies are massively profitable, the argument of "think of the poor pharma companies doing r&d and their costs uwu" isn't really valid.