Monitored Alarm Systems

Today, in a judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada, Pfizer lost its patent on Viagra Canada after a long battle fought with rival pharmaceutical manufacturer Teva , trying to make a generic version of the popular drug. Although the patent does not expire until 2014, Teva argued (and the Supreme Court agreed, but the lower courts had rejected the argument) that was, in fact, never been valid in the first place, because it is written in a way that is obscure information required disclosure of patent

holds patent P 2163446 for the use of a "compound of formula (I)" or "salts" as a medicament for the treatment of dysfunction dysfunction ("ED"). Pat concludes with claims seven cascaded increasingly small ranges of compounds having the claims 6 and 7 relating to each single compound. Only sildenafil, the subject matter of claim 7 and the compound Active Viagra has proved effective in the treatment of erectile dysfunction at the time of application. Though the patent includes the statement that "one particularly preferred compounds induced penile erection in impotent men, "the patent application discloses that the compound is a function of sildenafil, located in claim 7, and the remaining compounds are not proven effective in the treatment of erectile dysfunction.

...

patent application did not meet the reporting requirements set out in the Patent Act, RSC 1985, c. P-4 (the "Act"). The patent system is based on a "market": the inventor is granted exclusive rights to a new and useful invention for a limited period of time in exchange for the disclosure of the invention so that society can benefit this knowledge. Sufficiency of disclosure is at the heart of the patent system, adequate disclosure in both specifications is a prerequisite to the issuance of a patent.

The fault lies in this concept so important a few times: no information, there can be no patent. It is good to see that the jurisdiction of this central point, because pharmaceutical companies are known for trying to twist the patent system, so you get almost perpetual monopolies on their drugs, while the envelope further research and manufacturing methods as secretly as possible. United States, Pfizer has had a similar confrontation with Teva on generic Viagra from 2010, in which Pfizer won with a

second

patent does not cover the compound Viagra active itself, but the marketing of it as erectile dysfunction medication. Thus, although the core of the drug patent expires this year, probably retain a monopoly, Pfizer until 2019. This is in stark contrast to the UK, where the patent on the use of the drug for the treatment of erectile dysfunction was clearly invalidated the way in 2000, but Pfizer

still

it dominates the market with patents for manufacturing processes.

Basically, Pfizer uses a method I can think of to keep their patents expire and benefits to the public how they are supposed to patents, including writing the revelations that obscure the facts necessary . The Supreme Court did not want it, instead of letting the disclosure of Pfizer retroactively fix or submit a partial solution that allowed them to maintain the patent, the judgment rightly states that patents must be an agreement between two parties to perform, and therefore the patent is (and always has been) invalid:


Although art. 27 does not specify a resource for insufficient disclosure, the quid pro quo underlying the Act leads to the conclusion that the grant of the patent is the logical consequence of the lack of adequate publicity to the invention and how it works.

Find best price for : --Patent----Pfizer----Viagra--