bbj3n546pt
29th March 2012, 16:04
Since 2001, the [U.S.] Federal Trade Commission has worked on behalf of the consumer to sue drug companies that pay off the makers of competing drugs not to bring their [competing] products to market. The companies do this by using a loophole in current law to effectively block all other generic drug competition.
In addition, these anticompetitive “sweetheart” deals in which a payment is made to the generic competitor keep the generic drug off the market, on average, 17 months longer .... Considering that generic entry can reduce the price of a branded drug by up to 90 percent, it’s easy to understand why branded firms are willing to pay generics not to come to market – and then share their illegally obtained monopoly revenues.
Source: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/reporter/payfordelay.shtm
In addition, these anticompetitive “sweetheart” deals in which a payment is made to the generic competitor keep the generic drug off the market, on average, 17 months longer .... Considering that generic entry can reduce the price of a branded drug by up to 90 percent, it’s easy to understand why branded firms are willing to pay generics not to come to market – and then share their illegally obtained monopoly revenues.
Source: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/reporter/payfordelay.shtm