My colleague, Professor Erika Lietzan (Missouri) has introduced a seriously interesting and comprehensive short article walking by the heritage of the Hatch-Waxman laws system commencing with some proposals in the 1970s by its passage in 1984.  The short article is vital in the midst of rising phone calls for reform of the procedure.

She writes:

[T]he conventional knowledge about the Hatch–Waxman Amendments — as a privately negotiated compromise between the progressive and generic industries in which each and every received and each and every lost — is wrong. . . . The truth of the matter is far more nuanced, and the equilibrium of added benefits and charges distinct.

Fundamentally – and at the possibility of oversimplification – Prof. Lietzan argues that this compromise investigation ignores the vital envisioned broad social profit of generic involvement championed by Rep. Waxman and General public Citizen.  Lietzan writes that the end result of this general public alliance with generic entrants “made generic providers improved off, and it manufactured patent homeowners even worse off.”  That end result are not able to be discussed by the classic insider-negotiated story.

Browse a draft right here: Erika Lietzan, The Political Economy of the Hatch-Waxman Amendments (March 13, 2018). Seton Hall Law Overview, Forthcoming. Offered at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3140141

 

&#13
&#13

Dennis Crouch


Shares 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: