COVID and Patent laws --- Capitalism versus Socialism

[sygn]

So this just came up on my newsfeed:

"Canada decided to ignore drug/device patents during outbreak under new law
Canada’s emergency legislation on the coronavirus crisis gives the health minister powers to circumvent patent law and ensure medical supplies, medication or vaccines can be produced locally."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...idUSKBN21D3HT?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

I read of similar positive stories:
--Costa Rican government urged WHO to create a "voluntary emergency Technology Intellectual Property Pool [TIPP] for broad sharing of the benefits of scientific advancement and its applications in furtherance of the right to health."
-- 'Smiths Group' has made its intellectual property (manufacturing ventilators) available for other manufacturers. AbbVie is allowing generic production of lopinavir/ ritonavir to all countries.

But a few negative ones too:
-- 'Intersurgical' made legal threats re patent infringement, to those who 3D-printed an expensive ventilator valve.
-- US Republicans:

"In February, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., and other House members wrote to Trump pleading that he “ensure that any vaccine or treatment developed with U.S. taxpayer dollars be accessible, available and affordable,” a goal they said couldn’t be met “if pharmaceutical corporations are given authority to set prices and determine distribution, putting profit-making interests ahead of health priorities.”
When the coronavirus funding was being negotiated, Schakowsky tried again.

But many Republicans opposed adding language to the bill that would restrict the industry’s ability to profit, arguing that it would stifle research and innovation.
The final aid package not only omitted language that would have limited drug makers’ intellectual property rights, it also left out language that had been in an earlier draft that would have allowed the federal government to take any action if it has concerns that the treatments or vaccines developed with public funds are priced too high.:

https://theintercept.com/2020/03/13/big-pharma-drug-pricing-coronavirus-profits/

 

[sygn]

So from where I'm standing at the moment, US Republicans are looking pretty bad at the moment.

But it's not the first time that facts were distorted by Liberal media, nor do I have an economic understanding to foresee long-term implications of such measures.

Is it true that his fellow Republican politicians tried to block Jan Schakowsky's proposal, and if so, why?

 

[sygn]

http://quotesbae.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Funny-boredom-meme-pictures.j/IMG][/QUOTE] calm your titties, I'm not trying to attack your hero. I remember clearly how he tried to stop BigPharma& from inflating drug prices. It's about Republicans apparently putting corporate profit over people.

 

[bellisarius]

So this just came up on my newsfeed:

"Canada decided to ignore drug/device patents during outbreak under new law
Canada’s emergency legislation on the coronavirus crisis gives the health minister powers to circumvent patent law and ensure medical supplies, medication or vaccines can be produced locally."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...idUSKBN21D3HT?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

I read of similar positive stories:
--Costa Rican government urged WHO to create a "voluntary emergency Technology Intellectual Property Pool [TIPP] for broad sharing of the benefits of scientific advancement and its applications in furtherance of the right to health."
-- 'Smiths Group' has made its intellectual property (manufacturing ventilators) available for other manufacturers. AbbVie is allowing generic production of lopinavir/ ritonavir to all countries.

But a few negative ones too:
-- 'Intersurgical' made legal threats re patent infringement, to those who 3D-printed an expensive ventilator valve.
-- US Republicans:

"In February, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., and other House members wrote to Trump pleading that he “ensure that any vaccine or treatment developed with U.S. taxpayer dollars be accessible, available and affordable,” a goal they said couldn’t be met “if pharmaceutical corporations are given authority to set prices and determine distribution, putting profit-making interests ahead of health priorities.”
When the coronavirus funding was being negotiated, Schakowsky tried again.

But many Republicans opposed adding language to the bill that would restrict the industry’s ability to profit, arguing that it would stifle research and innovation.
The final aid package not only omitted language that would have limited drug makers’ intellectual property rights, it also left out language that had been in an earlier draft that would have allowed the federal government to take any action if it has concerns that the treatments or vaccines developed with public funds are priced too high.:

https://theintercept.com/2020/03/13/big-pharma-drug-pricing-coronavirus-profits/

"It's in the interest of national security" is the phrase used by every communist regime to justify the theft of intellectual property.

That being the case, is Canada a nation of communists or just common fucking thieves?

 

[sygn]

"It's in the interest of national security" is the phrase used by every communist regime to justify the theft of intellectual property.

That being the case, is Canada a nation of communists or just common fucking thieves?

I wasn't clear in my writing - the decree applies strictly to this emergency situation, after which patent laws apply as usual.

As for Jan Schakowsky's proposal, the wording "any vaccine or treatment developed with U.S. taxpayer dollars be be accessible, available and affordable" drew my attention.

Because of that, both seemed to me more than fair, and Reps. who opposed it - kinda...

 

[Hugh_Essay]

If its developed with taxpayer's money, it should belong to the taxpayers, no? The poor and uneducated americans have been brainwashed into thinking big pharma can do no wrong. Just look at the dipshit bellisaurus..

 

[bellisarius]

I wasn't clear in my writing - the decree applies strictly to this emergency situation, after which patent laws apply as usual.

As for Jan Schakowsky's proposal, the wording "any vaccine or treatment developed with U.S. taxpayer dollars be be accessible, available and affordable" drew my attention.

Because of that, both seemed to me more than fair, and Reps. who opposed it - kinda...

The rights to use any patent or copyright issued that was developed with the taxpayers monies can be purchased for $1. We even allow the Canadians to buy the rights.

In the case of privately developed drugs the government does have a safety valve im place should the manufacturer decide to engage in price gouging.

But the government has a potentially powerful safety valve at its disposal to counteract outrageous pricing by the pharmaceutical industry. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1498 (“Section 1498”), the federal government has the power to use or manufacture any patented product, and must provide only “reasonable” compensation to the patent holder. The government could therefore elect to either contract with another manufacturer to produce a cheap generic version of expensive patented drugs. Or it could use the threat of Section 1498 to negotiate a license from the brand-name manufacturer to use their drugs at a steep discount.