Editor's comment: A drug problem
You only have to glance at an industry going through real structural change to see how hollow are the claims repeatedly made for the 'revolution' hitting the legal services market. Take the drugs business, which is chronicled in this month's in depth feature, for instance. The market that allowed large Western pharmaceutical companies to sustain heavy investment in research and development (R&D), leading to lucrative, high-margin products, is under intense pressure on a number of fronts.
March 17, 2010 at 08:04 PM
3 minute read
Pharma woes give lawyers a chance to shine
You only have to glance at an industry going through real structural change to see how hollow are the claims repeatedly made for the 'revolution' hitting the legal services market.
Take the drugs business, which is chronicled in this month's in depth feature, for instance. The market that allowed large Western pharmaceutical companies to sustain heavy investment in research and development (R&D), leading to lucrative, high-margin products, is under intense pressure on a number of fronts.
Perhaps most challenging is the rise of generic drug companies, which produce versions of originator companies' blockbuster drugs. This has undermined the business model of industry leaders like Merck and Novartis. The related globalisation of the drugs market has exacerbated these pressures, with emerging markets increasingly geared to the production of large quantities of low-margin generics.
In addition, patents on many of these lucrative drugs are set to expire in the next five years. Some lawyers focused on the sector forecast that the era of the blockbuster drug is rapidly drawing to a close. It could also be argued that the industry is facing the intractable problem of having got the easy wins in pharmacological terms now behind it, a shift that leaves drug firms, in the words of one partner, striving to tackle "the hard stuff, like cancer".
Other pressures on the sector include the European Commission's high-profile inquiry into the EU's drugs market, which has major competition implications for the industry, and developments in modern medicine that put more emphasis on biologics (drugs derived from human and animal cells).
This latter development has opened a whole new area of legal dispute as it is far less clear the extent to which companies can patent discoveries drawing on nature. While there is no sign yet of the originator v generic dispute ending any time soon – EC figures show such litigation has surged over the last decade – litigators are predicting a new wave of disputes between originator companies attempting to bring competing biologic drugs to market.
With these pressures, large companies have embarked on a wave of takeovers to secure stronger product pipelines and cut R&D costs. There has also been a surge in the number of out-licensing and partnering deals as bluechips cut deals with smaller companies with promising drugs under development.
Much of the underlying issue is supply and demand. In an increasingly globalised drugs market, the dwindling stock of protected intellectual property (IP) is being stretched ever more thinly. For obvious reasons, this represents a fascinating opportunity for lawyers to show the extent to which they can contribute substantive value to clients locked in a struggle to secure vital IP. As it happens, there appear to be similar stakes facing the lawyers working in the media and the internet, which will be next month's focus.
For more, see In depth: Pharmaceuticals
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMcDermott Hits Paul Hastings In London Again As Macfarlanes Also Swoops For Talent
2 minute readRe-Examining Values: Greenberg Traurig's Executive Chairman on the Lessons of the Pandemic
4 minute readDiversity Commitments Feel Hollow When Firms Cosy Up to Oppressive Regimes
Trending Stories
- 1Meta Hires Litigation Strategy Chief, Tapping King & Spalding Partner Who Was Senior DOJ Official in First Trump Term
- 2Courts Beginning to Set Standards for Evidence Relying upon Artificial Intelligence
- 3First-Degree Murder Charge May Not Fit Mangione Case
- 4Legal Tech's Predictions for Legal Ops & In-House in 2025
- 5SDNY US Attorney Damian Williams Lands at Paul Weiss
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250