2 ms·
It's unfortunate that we call the protection for pharmaceutical products "patents." They are probably more like a copyright on a compound with a 20-year expira
by OldSchool 14y ago
It's unfortunate that we call the protection for pharmaceutical products "patents." They are probably more like a copyright on a compound with a 20-year expiration. Yes, this is totally necessary, also as is preventing someone from knocking out a direct copy of some innovative physical machine.
Conventional wisdom for a long time considered software more like a book (or else the "author" of the first spreadsheet would probably be a billionaire many times over).
When the legal industry saw the money involved in software during the dot-com boom they muscled their way in, as any racketeers would do. Their racket is of course protection and counter-protection services riding on the conveniently-broken USPTO.
- chc 14y agoNo, they're entirely functional. You can't copyright, say, penicillin (it is not a creative work!), but you can get a patent on the use of penicillin to kill microorganisms.
- OldSchool 14y agoYeah that's true, the specific application is involved so its not strictly equivalent to a copyright. All in all, I think the pharmaceutical industry is a place where patents themselves seem to work as intended even if manufacturers' legal, sales and marketing departments have been known to take atrocious liberties.