The Biden administration unveiled a new framework outlining the factors federal agencies should consider in determining whether to use march-in rights.

The Biden administration on Thursday asserted its authority to seize the patents of certain costly medications in a new push to slash high drug prices and promote more pharmaceutical competition.

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 break the patents of drugs that were developed with federal funds but are not widely accessible to the public. For the first time, officials can now factor in a medication’s price — a change that could have big implications for drugmakers depending on how the government uses the powers.

“When drug companies won’t sell taxpayer-funded drugs at reasonable prices, we will be prepared to allow other companies to provide those drugs for less,” White House National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard said during a call with reporters Wednesday.

  • chitak166@lemmy.world
    186·
    11 months ago

    This is a good thing.

    Copyright and patent laws need to die.

    Only an idiot thinks we wouldn’t develop drugs without them.

    • maryjayjay@lemmy.world
      121·
      11 months ago

      Patents are written into the Constitution and are generally a good thing when enforced as they are written to be. The problem is the system has been so perverted and abused that it’s a joke of what is supposed to be.

    • linuxdweeb@lemm.ee
      31·
      11 months ago

      What’s wrong with copyright law? It definitely needs to be reformed, in particular the term lengths and the nonsense-laden DMCA. But for the most part, it’s a good thing.

    • PLAVAT🧿SEnglish
      21·
      11 months ago

      While outside the scope of the article I disagree with the notion patents need to go away. If privately funded, developed, and created a patent incentivizes ingenuity and has it’s place. That said, limits of some sort prevent monopolies/exploitation and are the other side of a healthy system. **If publicly funded in any way the people have a right to it.

      I know Lemmy is very anti-corpo and I generally I am too. But for a personal inventor imagine spending years of your life on a project only to have your only way to seek compensation for that work taken away - unless you’re a total saint you would never want to create again (or certainly wouldn’t share it).

      The counter point is that if it can save millions of people it certainly seems wrong to withhold it for personal gain, and so there must be a compromise somewhere or that’d make the person evil (which most corporations end up being).