How India's Patent Office Destroyed Gilead's Global Game Plan • Hacker News Board

Re: How India's Patent Office Destroyed Gilead's Global Game Plan

#71

Post by chetanahuja » Sat, Jan 17, 2015, 7:03 AM UTC

danmaz74 wrote: post #37

I'm all against "obvious" patents, but suing to be free to produce a product because it "also doesn't demonstrate it's significantly more effective than already known compounds" is a contradiction in terms. If the other compounds were just as good, then you wouldn't be suing to be able to produce this new one.

The original article has an interview with an Indian patent examiner that clarifies that the efficacy was not a factor in deciding whether the drug was patentable. It's difference(in chemical structure) from previously well known molecules -- or lack thereof -- was the decisive factor in rejecting that patent.

Re: How India's Patent Office Destroyed Gilead's Global Game Plan

#72

Post by danmaz74 » Sat, Jan 17, 2015, 8:21 AM UTC

chetanahuja wrote: post #71

danmaz74 wrote: post #37

I'm all against "obvious" patents, but suing to be free to produce a product because it "also doesn't demonstrate it's significantly more effective than already known compounds" is a contradiction in terms. If the other compounds were just as good, then you wouldn't be suing to be able to produce this new one.

The original article has an interview with an Indian patent examiner that clarifies that the efficacy was not a factor in deciding whether the drug was patentable. It's difference(in chemical structure) from previously well known molecules -- or lack thereof -- was the decisive factor in rejecting that patent.

Thanks for the info.

But then my doubt is the same: If the old ones are the same as this one, then why sue to be able to use the new one free? Just produce the old one... it's the same.

Re: How India's Patent Office Destroyed Gilead's Global Game Plan

#73

Post by entropydude » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 4:20 AM UTC

chdir wrote: post #8

According to Wikipedia: Sofosbuvir costs US$84,000 for 12 weeks of treatment used for genotypes 1 and 2 (about US$1,000 per pill) [...] health care costs in California could increase by US$18–29 billion per year because of this medication

Well...we would probably need to factor in the long term costs. Hepatitis C is the leading cause of liver transplantation. The pre-transplant work, surgery, and medical follow up costs on the order of $500,000 each. Not including complications. Obviously everyone with Hepatitis C does not reach cirrhosis to the point of tranplant, but it's still a sizeable number.