Pfizer caught "gaming the system," loses Viagra patent in Canada

page: 1
16

log in

join

posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Pfizer caught "gaming the system," loses Viagra patent in Canada


arstechnica.com

But US consumers will keep paying monopoly prices until 2019

Pfizer's legal monopoly on one of its top-selling drugs just got shredded in Canada. The Canadian Supreme Court has ruled 7-0 the company should have its patent taken away because the drug company attempted to "game" the system, grabbing a patent without disclosing what their invention really was.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
canlii.ca

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Pfizer pays $60M to settle bribery charges
Inhaler made by Pfizer increases risk of dying by 52%
edit on 9-11-2012 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   
It appears that the global giant Pfizer (which "owns" more companies of note than you can shake a stick at) has been exposed as one of those mega-corporations who use verbal-legal trickery to secure patents....

Not exactly news in the sense of "shocking" and "unheard of" it nevertheless points to a reality about "ownership" and "Patents" which we seem to not be informed about much here in the US.


Pfizer was able to acquire its Canadian patent without naming the compound required to make Viagra, namely, sildenafil citrate. The Canadian patent system, like all patent systems, is a kind of bargain between patentees, who are given a limited monopoly on a particular product or process, and the public, which is supposed to benefit from the disclosure of a new invention, the justices noted in their opinion.

"Pfizer had the information needed to disclose the useful compound and chose not to release it," the ruling said. "As a matter of policy and sound statutory interpretation, patentees cannot be allowed to 'game' the system in this way."


From the court's opinion:


on appeal from the federal court of appeal

Intellectual property — Patents — Disclosure requirements — Patent for use of compound to treat erectile disfunction — Patent application containing cascading claims ending with two individual compounds — Claims not specifying active compound — Whether patent application meeting disclosure requirements of Patent Act — Whether patent based on sound prediction — Patent Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P‑4, s. 27(3).

P holds Patent 2,163,446 for the use of a “compound of formula (I)” or a “salt thereof” as a medicament for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (“ED”). The patent’s specification ends with seven cascading claims for successively smaller ranges of compounds, with Claims 6 and 7 relating to a single compound each. Only sildenafil, the subject of Claim 7 and the active compound in Viagra, had been shown to be effective in treating ED at the time of the patent application. Although the patent includes the statement that “one of the especially preferred compounds induces penile erection in impotent males”, the patent application does not disclose that the compound that works is sildenafil, that it is found in Claim 7, or that the remaining compounds had not been found to be effective in treating ED.

T applied for a notice of compliance in order to produce a generic version of Viagra. The Federal Court prohibited the Minister from issuing the requested notice of compliance. The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Held: The appeal should be allowed. Patent 2,163,446 is void.


All emphasis is my own.

Now here's the question... why "bundle" chemicals not known to be effective with the drug as a single patent? What do they gain? - Perhaps the ability to block others from using those chemicals in other ways? I don't know.

Also, if one nations justice system finds such an issue ... what will our justice system do.... besides hope no Americans read about this?


In the US, Pfizer's patent rights on Viagra were originally set to expire in 2012. But when generic companies moved to enter the market, Pfizer piled on a "method-of-use" patent over the same drug, set to expire in 2019. A federal judge upheld that patent after a bench trial last year, so Pfizer will be the only company allowed to sell sildenafil in the US for at least seven more years, and prices will remain high.


arstechnica.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Maybe the reason they "bundle" chemicals is because sildenafil citrate is not patentable on its own (an already existing substance), but if they combine it with a bunch of useless chemicals/binders/fillers it becomes a "new" chemical/drug and thus becomes "patentable" ?




posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Good.

I'm glad big pharma had to give something up for a change..

Funny how I just learned that Pfizer owns Monsanto...

~Tenth



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 





It appears that the global giant Pfizer (which "owns" more companies of note than you can shake a stick at) has been exposed as one of those mega-corporations who use verbal-legal trickery to secure patents....


Great to see this news. S&F

One of the companies which Pfizer "owns" is none other than Monsanto


Former Monsanto is today known as Pharmacia. Pharmacia is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer Inc., which together with its subsidiaries operates the Pharmaceuticals Business.


Hopefully this will take those bastards down a notch or two.

All the Big Pharma companies should be dismantled and burned IMO.
edit on 9-11-2012 by MagicWand67 because: add link and ex quote



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by CranialSponge
 


They do it to stretch a patent.

A patent is supposed to be for one item, but if I get away with a vague patent, I can make it 'interpretable'.

This was a very good move by the supreme court. Hopefully some heads will roll in the patent office, as Pfizer should never really been issued a patent that didn't contain the actual quantity and type of chemicals used (and yes, the patent office will keep confidentiality).



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Great info. Thanks. Hopefully a sign of the times, and the legal argument will fly in more nations. We need to break Big Pharma's control any way we can. ...and most interesting that Pfizer owns Monsanto.



posted on Nov, 9 2012 @ 08:41 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 



I assume Pfizer's US patent has been given a good once over and cleared of the same discrepancy as well.
I would love to see AstraZenca pulled under like this as well with regard to Nexium, Greedy bastards all of em.



T applied for a notice of compliance in order to produce a generic version of Viagra. The Federal Court prohibited the Minister from issuing the requested notice of compliance. The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.


So does 'T' above represent the original whistle blower on Pfizer? I wonder if the Appeals Court is benched primarily with old men? But then again the appeal would have been dismissed with equal vigor had it been benched by mostly women.

edit on 10-11-2012 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Great news,.
maybe the cost will go down then, I mean jeez.. its like 20 a pill
Not that I'd know personally,



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Wow, it seems I just found this out.

It is no wonder we have 1%er's, everything is nothing but a big ring of greed.



Raist



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Chalk one up for Canada, however, if you look at how they handle their NHP's (natural health products) it's absolutely dismal.

One big pharma company bites the dust but 20-40,000 natural products are off the shelves. I wonder if this has anything to do with all the generic drug manufacturers in Canada (Apotex et al.) or if it's really just about holding one pharma to account?



Of course the generics are going to make more money without the patent...



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 



I wonder if this has anything to do with all the generic drug manufacturers in Canada (Apotex et al.) or if it's really just about holding one pharma to account?

... Of course the generics are going to make more money without the patent...


The Canadian government is all about corporate partnerships - and the government in power chooses which corporations to partner with...



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


The Company i work for just acquired the pattern for Canada. It is usually unknown to me(usually the regal affairs know this), but a message was sent to my email today and a piece of celebratory cake during lunch lol.





new topics
top topics
 
16

log in

join