AAF Altachem Pharma Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : AAF Altachem Pharma

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 PreviousNext

To: ciderapple who wrote ()	1/17/2000 11:20:00 AM
From: Jim Burnham	of 42

STGI/AAF lawsuit It is obvious that someone isn't telling the truth. AAF claims that they have world-wide licensing rights to ANTICORT. STGI claims that AAF has only the licensing rights for Canada and an option to match any offer for licensing for countries in the British Commonwealth. So who is telling the truth? Well, if you dig around a little on AAF's web page, you will find a page about Proprietary Drugs. altachempharma.com If you look at the fifth paragraph starting with a 1. Anticort you will read the following: <em>The company has purchased an exclusive licensing agreement from Steroidogensis Inhibitors International Inc. (SII) to manufacture, use, distribute and sell Anticort? for Canada and an option to purchase the same license for any other Country which is a member of the British Commonwealth as of the effective date of the "agreement" (February 10, 1996). </em> It sure looks like STGI is telling the truth. So let's not let the worldwide right be an issue here. The only thing that is an issue is the British Commonwealth. According to AAF they have an option to purchase the same license for any country which is a member of the British Commonwealth. STGI says that AAF has the right to match any bona fide offer for the Commonwealth countries. Now, I'm no lawyer, but is there really any difference in the two statements? I don't think so. So, I strongly believe that AAF has no basis for this lawsuit other than an attempt to strong arm STGI. It seems that it is only endangering they rights for the Canadian license. Usually a licensing contract has a performance clause in it. If AAF hasn't been faithfully obtaining the approval for ANTICORT in Canada, SI Canada can probably revoke the license. That would leave AAF out in the wind. Not to mention that the damages for interfering in the Pashua deal without just cause. That might prove to the be end of AAF. Jim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 PreviousNext