[Ip-health] Put the patents at risk, not the patients

Michael H Davis m.davis at csuohio.edu
Fri May 29 09:30:09 PDT 2015


Good points but one was needlessly overstated. In many compulsory licenses, the majority, I suspect, the monopoly does not end. It is just made more reasonable in that particular market. Many might say that it just applies the price a reasonable monopolist would charge poor people.



__________________________________


Prof. Mickey Davis
216/687-2228(phone)
917/771-0235 (cell)



Office address:
Cleveland State University
2121 Euclid Avenue, LB 234
Cleveland, OH 44115-2214

Campus Location:
Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
1801 Euclid Avenue
Law Building, LB 234

Mailing Address:

50 Avenue A
Suite 3A
NYC, N.Y. 10009
917-771-0235

Admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Reg. No. 45,863


-------- Original message --------
From: Jamie Love <james.love at keionline.org>
Date: 05/29/2015 10:42 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: Ip-health <ip-health at lists.keionline.org>
Subject: [Ip-health] Put the patents at risk, not the patients

http://www.keionline.org/node/2234

The TPP, following a plethora of other trade agreements involving the
United States, the European Union and Japan as trading partners, seeks to
expand and extend drug monopolies, by requiring lower standards for the
grant of patents, extensions of patent terms, exclusive rights in test
data, among other measures. These proposals and polices are designed to
have the predictable effect of making drug prices higher.

Governments and private reimbursement entities (including employer managed
plans, and private insurance plans) respond to higher prices by restricting
access, and placing higher financial burdens on patients and families.
Access can be restricted in a variety of ways, such as through price
sensitive formularies, narrow approved uses, and higher patient
co-payments, or even a complete unwillingness to reimburse the product at
all (such as for the effective breast cancer drug T-DM1 in Northern
Ireland, Wales and Scotland).

In our view, policy needs a reboot. Put the patents at risk, not the
patients. When prices are too high, use compulsory licenses to end
monopolies. Make the expensive drugs less expensive, don't use the patients
as hostages.
And, if people think lower prices lead to lower R&D investments, and are
concerned about this, there are plenty of options that don't put patients
at risk. Governments can mandate higher R&D investments or contributions to
R&D funds from companies selling drugs (as DHHS did with cisplatin sales),
increase government R&D spending, or implement full delinkage of R&D costs
from drug prices. All of these provide mechanisms to enhance R&D spending
without putting at risk the patient's access to a useful drug or vaccine.

In 2015, it should not be so so hard to tell patent owners they will lose a
monopoly, or so easy to tell patients a drug is not reimbursed.

http://www.keionline.org/sites/default/files/u4/failures_1.png

--
James Love.  Knowledge Ecology International
http://www.keionline.org/donate.html
KEI DC tel: +1.202.332.2670, US Mobile: +1.202.361.3040, Geneva Mobile:
+41.76.413.6584, twitter.com/jamie_love
_______________________________________________
Ip-health mailing list
Ip-health at lists.keionline.org
http://lists.keionline.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health_lists.keionline.org



More information about the Ip-health mailing list