The Epi-Pen and competitor was an interesting case because Mylan was blocking competitors through the FDA by keeping the alternate designs unapproved. So people weren't allowed to copy the design, but they also weren't allowed to market unapproved alternatives.
The fact that an alternative finally came out during the Trump admin says a lot about what's been going on behind the scenes.
Which only further proves my point that the issue is the FDA gatekeeping. Patents in and of themselves do not provide any sort of legal basis that prevents competition. Were "Big Pharma" at the root of the issue, you'd see generics and brand names being the same price.
Who said they were? The point is that they were and that was why it took as long as it did. No one forced the FDA to do it. There was no gun to their head. They disrupted patent law by allowing it to happen, thus they are entirely at fault for it.
The Epi-Pen and competitor was an interesting case because Mylan was blocking competitors through the FDA by keeping the alternate designs unapproved. So people weren't allowed to copy the design, but they also weren't allowed to market unapproved alternatives.
The fact that an alternative finally came out during the Trump admin says a lot about what's been going on behind the scenes.
Which only further proves my point that the issue is the FDA gatekeeping. Patents in and of themselves do not provide any sort of legal basis that prevents competition. Were "Big Pharma" at the root of the issue, you'd see generics and brand names being the same price.
No it doesn't further prove your point.
The FDA wasn't running interference for Mylan out of the goodness of their heart.
Who said they were? The point is that they were and that was why it took as long as it did. No one forced the FDA to do it. There was no gun to their head. They disrupted patent law by allowing it to happen, thus they are entirely at fault for it.