BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,562
- 9
- 81
Proposed solution:
1. Drug patents mugs specify a patent price.
2. If patent holder sells drug at price below patent price of at price more than 20% above patent price, the patent expires.
3. Patent holder may apply for upward adjustment in patent price based on inflation.
4. Other companies may offer generics at below the patent price with a 20% royalty to the patent holder.
The result is driving manufacturers have to estimate a market price for their drug. They can then sell their drug for a 20% premium above this price. If they are too greedy and overstate the competitive (patent) price, generic manufacturers can undercut them. The original company will still receive 20% of the actual sale price.
To illustrate: a company patents a new drug at $100. They can sell it between $100 and $120 without losing the patent. If a generic can manufacture the drug for $70, they could sell it for $95, pay $19 in royalties and make $6 in profit.
Here the patent holder was too greedy. If they had stated the patent price at $85, they could sell it for $102 and the generic would be unable to undercut them.
Obvious the percentages can be adjusted to insure an adequate recovery of R&D and profit by the patent holder.
Interesting idea. Similar could be done for copyright as well.
Still, that's not what's happening here as the thread has pointed out many times. This drug is not patented, it's just that there's only one company in the US who is allowed to sell it currently, and the process to get approved to sell it is extremely expensive. So government regulation is responsible for this guy's ability to gouge patients.