[Ip-health] Eminent Domain

George Carter fiar at verizon.net
Wed Nov 28 13:23:20 PST 2012


A friend put the question regarding the refusal by Gilead's executives to allow further study of GS-7977 with the BMS drug, and the answer was not encouraging but not surprising either. I probably jumped ahead of myself in previous posts, but basically I had not held much hope that Eminent Domain would be invoked in the United States, given the corruption of the US government and its coziness with pharma--wherefore I was wondering about the use of such a law as it may exist in other countries.

The combo described, GS-7977+daclatasvir, remains the most promising, most effective and least toxic that I have seen. (For example, a recent phase 3 of GS-7977+ribavirin showed inferior results and ribavirin causes horrible anemia.)

The query and reply:
http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-it-possible-to-sue-a-pharmaceutical-company-for-1017417.html?utm_campaign=answer_notify&utm_content=question_legal&utm_medium=email&utm_source=notification 

The article he references is the same one that I had previously posted here, which he interprets basically as being essentially no chance in hell:
http://www.ipprospective.com/copyright-caucus/intellectual-property-and-eminent-domain-a-plausible-combination/ 

Still seeking further thoughts on this while Gilead--and its CEO John C. Martin, laughs all the way to the bank while we die. Seems to me that's not just moral outrage but a threat to life and limb, representing a more substantial cause of action.
George M. Carter





More information about the Ip-health mailing list