Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (36592)	8/27/2009 7:10:25 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: "If patents are routinely extended" I don't think that anything about our patent system is actually "routine". :-) Re: "How long patents should be is another question" Yep! And, IMO, a really GOOD question to be asking ourselves, too! I for one would be HAPPY to allow any pharmaceutical company a clear shot at getting a patent of even 30, 40, maybe even 50 years length if they could come up with a way to actually CURE some disease state! (Not just come up with a pill for people to take every day that manages the condition without resolving the underlying pathology... which is by far the most common modality now --- a system designed more to maximize corporate profit streams, to 'annuitize' their profits --- then to maximize public health.) I think we should ENCOURAGE bolder and more productive medical research through the financial rewards that patent protection provides.... Say something along the lines of: CURE a condition and get rewarded with an extra-long-lived patent... but just come up with another 'me-too pill' and only get maybe a 10 year patent term. No reason why we can't encourage beneficial medical research through capitalist rewards....