Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think the whole evergreening and "patent a trivial change to our drug because the previous patent expiring" thing is wrong, but a company should profit after inventing a life-saving drug.

Look at it this way, if tomorrow a company came out with a complete cure for cancer, and we took away their right to profit from it, yes it'd put cancer victims in a good spot. But it'd screw everyone with a not-yet-cured disease over, when the company can't afford to pay employees, and the medical research industry goes down the drain.

People work for a profit, and that includes medical researches, who go through years of school. You take away that profit motive, they'll have to go do something else to put a roof over their head, and you'll save more lives in the short-term at a very high very long-term expense.



Sure... US $58.566 billion (2011) is not enough profits


But they only have that profit because they have patents. You can't use it to justify the claim that patents are unnecessary.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: