←back to thread

FTC challenges 'junk' patents held by 10 drugmakers, incl Novo Nordisk's Ozempic

(www.cnbc.com)
152 points toomuchtodo | 1 comments | 30 Apr 24 21:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.215s | source
Show context
akira2501 ◴[30 Apr 24 21:33 UTC] No.40216636[source]▶
Good.

They patented inhalers for a second time. It's the exact same drug. The only thing that changed was the propellant. It went from R-12 to R-134a. Everyone who had to switch out R-12 from refrigeration to drug manufacturing switched to R-134a. There was absolutely _nothing_ novel about it.

It was _criminal_ to allow them the second patent for just the propellant change. It took generic $5 inhalers off the market and replaced them with $95 inhalers. It was was one of the most corrupt swindles I've ever personally seen.

replies(4): >>40216858 #>>40216885 #>>40217053 #>>40241727 #
RheingoldRiver ◴[30 Apr 24 21:52 UTC] No.40216858[source]▶
> It took generic $5 inhalers off the market and replaced them with $95 inhalers.

OOTL, what is stopping companies from making generics of the older version & patients just not using the new version?

replies(4): >>40216891 #>>40216937 #>>40216991 #>>40217174 #
ceejayoz ◴[30 Apr 24 22:00 UTC] No.40216937[source]▶
Among other things, they pay them not to.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna447916

> Known as "reverse settlement payments," or "pay-to-delay" deals, the financial arrangements are a unique but common practice in the pharmaceutical industry. Essentially, they allow drug manufacturers in some instances to pay competitors not to manufacture generic versions of their products, thereby ensuring that they maintain patent protection for as long as possible.

replies(1): >>40216965 #
azemetre ◴[30 Apr 24 22:02 UTC] No.40216965[source]▶
How is this NOT a violation of antitrust laws? How does this not hurt market competition or even more basic, how is this not collusion or a price cartel?
replies(1): >>40217088 #
1. observationist ◴[30 Apr 24 22:14 UTC] No.40217088[source]▶
It is. They make far more money than they lose in penalties when officials bother enforcing on any technical violations. It's such a huge pain in the ass to try enforcing these little violations and there's so much corruption and bureaucracy preventing effective enforcement of the big ones that any action against these companies at all is a noteworthy accomplishment for a regulatory agency.

Lina Khan is punching way above her weight and using the FTC to do the job it's ostensibly designed for. She's aggressively poking some very ornery and obnoxious bears, hopefully some precedents will be set and corruption repaired. Most regulators are incentivized to play within the whole wink-wink-nod-nod government revolving door system of crony capitalism, but Khan doesn't seem to be playing that game, which is nice.