SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
If you're going to overcharge the U.S. government, you don't want to get caught:
Mylan NV for years overcharged the U.S. Medicaid health program to buy its EpiPen shot, the government said Wednesday, despite being told that it needed to give bigger discounts under the law. From 2011 to 2015, the joint state-federal program for the poor spent about $797 million on EpiPens, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, said in a letter Wednesday. That included rebates of about 13 percent, but the U.S. should have been getting a larger discount of at least 23.1 percent.
While the agency didn't say exactly how much Mylan had overcharged, the amount could be substantial. Under law, companies are required to give [Medicaid] back any price increases they take on brand drugs above the rate of inflation, in addition to the 23.1 percent discount. Mylan, after acquiring the drug in 2007, has raised the price of EpiPen by about sixfold, to over $600 for a package of two. The government has in the past "expressly told Mylan that the product is incorrectly classified," CMS said in the letter, which came in response to an inquiry by Congress. "This incorrect classification has financial consequences for the amount that federal and state governments spend because it reduces the amount of quarterly rebates Mylan owes for EpiPen."
Previously:
EpiPen's Price Increased 400% since 2008
AllergyStop: $50 EpiPen is Production-Ready but...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday October 06 2016, @05:07PM
Please look up how trade secrets and contractual obligations operated pre-patent in England, and explain how that system is preferable.
Perhaps you could tell us what the problems are supposed to be, rather than us waste our time on a unicorn hunt.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Capt. Obvious on Thursday October 06 2016, @06:55PM
Well, an exhaustive list is difficult, and frankly would be just as long to read from me as from the type of research you're declining to do. But basically you had a lack of investment in things that could not be protected by trade secret, vicious anti-compete clauses in contracts, and a high likelihood innovations would disappear as the people who knew how to do them died out.
The best paraphrase I've heard is, "patent law enforces open hardware, but in return guarantees exclusivity for a short period of time."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @02:23AM
Basically you're just making things up, as is typical of IP proponents which are mostly composed of big business.
and trade secrets already exist anyways. There is zero evidence that patents encourage the revelation of trade secrets, patents are useless in this regard.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @01:27PM
For a real discussion on what patents do to innovation see
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130503/17414322946/discussions-abolition-patents-uk-france-germany-netherlands-1869.shtml [techdirt.com]
Also see the book Against Intellectual monopoly by Boldrin and Levine.
As far as England was concerned England was doing fine until patents came along
"This power was used to raise money for the Crown, and was widely abused, as the Crown granted patents in respect of all sorts of common goods (salt, for example). Consequently, the Court began to limit the circumstances in which they could be granted. After public outcry, James I of England was forced to revoke all existing monopolies and declare that they were only to be used for "projects of new invention"."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_patent_law [wikipedia.org]
It was businesses, as usual, that pushed for these monopolies and they caused so much harm that it was public outcry that lead to their restriction. Their restriction was a good thing.
Don't listen to the completely made up stories by patent supporters. IP has historically been pushed almost only by businesses that wish to limit competition (why should businesses decide laws) in their favor and the results have historically mostly been bad for the public and for innovation.