It's only OK to sue big corporations if they're your competitors
Tip of the hat to Pharmalot for pointing this out to me. "Reformers" often complain that the tort system discourages innovation and new product development, and therefore is preventing sick people from getting the drugs/products/surgeries they need. The pro-business, anti-consumer "reform" lobby decline to mention suits like this:
May 15 (Bloomberg) -- Johnson & Johnson's Cordis Corp. and drugmaker Abbott Laboratories sued each other over a new patent for methods of coating heart stents with protective drugs.
Cordis contends in a complaint filed in federal court in Trenton, New Jersey, today that Abbott is infringing the patent with its new Xience V stent, planned for sale in U.S. markets. Abbott claims in a suit filed today in Wilmington, Delaware, that the Cordis patent is invalid.
``The coronary stent industry is highly litigious'' and Johnson & Johnson ``has a well-known history of suing competitors,'' Abbott Park, Illinois-based Abbott said in its complaint. (Emphasis added.)
Source: Bloomberg.com: Health Care
Wouldn't you assume that the threat of being sued into oblivion by large competitors would be a much bigger deterrent to developing new products than the threat of being sued if your product kills or injures a customer? Why aren't groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce working to clamp down on the frivolous litigation in the coronary stent industry? Hmmm... I wonder... Could it be because the Chamber receives millions of dollars of funding every year from some of the companies who file these lawsuits against their competitors?
Comments