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.

  • bioemerl@kbin.social
    450·
    1 year ago

    This sounds like highway robbery. If the government wants patent rights for things they funded, they should include those terms in the grants and not do it after the fact.

    • Blackbeard@lemmy.worldMEnglish
      371·
      1 year ago

      They do:

      By contract, in the funding agreement, the funding agency allows the non-federal party to take title to the invention, but the funder retains some rights in the invention. One of those rights is the march-in right. In a march-in case, the non-federal entity retains ownership in the patent, but the funding agency can grant licenses to third parties to use the inventions. These non-voluntary licenses include royalties to patent holders. The federal government can’t issue the march-in licenses unless 4 conditions are met, set out by statute in 35 USC 203.

      • bioemerl@kbin.social
        323·
        1 year ago

        I’m neither coping nor seething. This looks like a bad policy to me and I’m describing exactly why with very little emotional investment.

        Biden knows this. Pay attention to the press release.

        “Ordered to consider…” Means this is a PR move.

    • AnonTwo@kbin.social
      52·
      1 year ago

      I think it’s fine to argue robbery of some sort, but “highway robbery” is pushing it.

      At worst both are wrong. The problem that led to this is that the patent was generated from tax payer money, and now the owner of the patent is exploiting those same tax payers.