The authoritarian Biden administration opened the door to using its assumed authority to seize the patents of certain costly medications. The regime wants to lower drug costs (in time for the 2024 election). Biden claims it’s also to promote more competition in the pharmaceutical industry.
The administration unveiled a new framework outlining the factors federal agencies should consider in determining whether to use a controversial policy known as march-in rights.
How will people feel knowing that the government can seize the patents whenever they want under the guise of costs and competition?
They are serious about doing it.
“The administration unveiled a framework outlining the factors federal agencies should consider in deciding whether to use a controversial policy, known as march-in rights, to take patents for drugs developed with taxpayer funds and share them with other pharmaceutical companies if the public cannot “reasonably” access the medications. Doing so could lead to the development of lower-priced generic alternatives, which could cut into key drug companies’ profits and reduce costs for patients.”
For the first time, officials can now factor in a medication’s price in deciding to break a patent. They illicitly changed the rules.
The administration will “make it clear that when drug companies don’t sell taxpayer-funded drugs at reasonable prices, we will be prepared to allow other companies to provide those drugs for less,” Lael Brainard, White House national economic advisor, told reporters.
That’s the excuse for stealing the property rights of the patent holders. That’s never okay. The Biden government and all those Obama and Soros advisers are seizing control of everything.
You can comment on the article after the ads and subscribe to the Daily Newsletter here if you would like a quick view of the articles of the day and any late news:
I don t know who made the picture with the wooden blocks or if it is AI generated, but they spelled ” patents” as “pantents”
When I work, as a contractor for the government, my work product is considered the government’s property. Just like when I work for a private company, my work product is the company’s. Since the funds that pay me to work, rightfully claim the product of my work.
Did the government give the money to the researcher, or the company? Does the company pay any part of the work being done? Then the taxpayer has claim to that product.
Were the patents extended to the company, or the person? If the patent was given to the person, not the company, then the government cannot ‘assume’ the patent. If the patent was to a team at a company, then the company owns the patent.
In either case, if the patent was on work done with taxpayer’s money, then the citizens own that portion of the patent. The government should claim the entire patent as ‘open’ to development by any other citizen or company headquartered within the nation.
I have never agreed to the idea that government employees should profit from patents developed while being paid taxpayer money. Just like a private company who develops a patent, gets the profits from using the patent, not a particular ‘star’ employee.
Government employees are not ‘free agents’ and should not be able to ‘patent’ work done within that employment. And should never have been allowed to do so. Especially, NGOs that operate mostly on ‘government contracts.’
The drugs were developed with taxpayer grants. Do business with the government at your own risk. On this one I don’t see a real problem.
I don’t either in theory but it does put a foot on the slippery slope.
ASSUMING that the government is putting in the money for the research.
We must also keep in mind that the government can’t even stop telemarketers. More government is worse government and this expands government control.
This is nothing short of pure communism.
NAZIS