There are many conflicting ideas surrounding pharmaceutical companies going into developing countries to collect samples of native plants. This opens the door for many companies, allowing them to create and patent new medicines from the samples and traditional knowledge. Under the patent law, these companies do not need to share revenues from drugs developed in part from the exploitation of traditional knowledge. Allergan operates on such terms. However, recently it has transferred its most valuable patent back to the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe. The Government grants Native Tribes sovereign immunity, this protects the tribes from certain federal rulings. One of the systems rendered ineffective against the Native Americans under protection is
…show more content…
On one hand, if this was discontinued, then the indigenous people would not receive extra funds. However, this will also allow the eventual invalidation of patents making items to become more affordable over time. From an economic standpoint, this would promote competition and competition will increase the quality of goods for consumers. On the other hand, if this was allowed, then other companies will make similar decisions. This would affect many indigenous groups positively at the expense of consumers who will have to cope with expensive products. I am leaning towards being against this action as I am a consumer that wishes for more affordable items. This does not mean I do not support the natives, as I believe that there are better ways to support them without going through another a middleman. The argument for this action as it benefits indigenous people can be substituted into saying companies that use child labor are ethical as they allow desperate children to have ways to make ends meet. Even if the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe agrees to be part of this bargain, this does not mean they are in a good deal. According to the statistic provided by Salon: the patent in agreement had 1.5$ billion USD in sales in one year, however, Allergan is only paying up to 15$ million USD a year to lease back the patent. This means that the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe is getting the short end of the
On one hand, if this was discontinued, then the indigenous people would not receive extra funds. However, this will also allow the eventual invalidation of patents making items to become more affordable over time. From an economic standpoint, this would promote competition and competition will increase the quality of goods for consumers. On the other hand, if this was allowed, then other companies will make similar decisions. This would affect many indigenous groups positively at the expense of consumers who will have to cope with expensive products. I am leaning towards being against this action as I am a consumer that wishes for more affordable items. This does not mean I do not support the natives, as I believe that there are better ways to support them without going through another a middleman. The argument for this action as it benefits indigenous people can be substituted into saying companies that use child labor are ethical as they allow desperate children to have ways to make ends meet. Even if the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe agrees to be part of this bargain, this does not mean they are in a good deal. According to the statistic provided by Salon: the patent in agreement had 1.5$ billion USD in sales in one year, however, Allergan is only paying up to 15$ million USD a year to lease back the patent. This means that the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe is getting the short end of the