Subject: [blowback] THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION HARASSES THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY! |
From: "basil.venitis" <basil.venitis@yahoo.com> |
Date: 7/30/12, 07:26 |
To: blowback@yahoogroups.com |
Reply-To: blowback-owner@yahoogroups.com |
Galileo muttered the phrase Eppur si muove, And yet it moves, after being forced
to recant in 1633, before the Inquisition, his belief that the Earth moves
around the Sun. Similarly the new inquisition of regulators force executives to admit something they did not do, in order to get smaller penalties. Eppur si muove!
The European Commission has informed the French pharmaceutical company Servier and several of its generic competitors of its objections against practices potentially delaying the generic entry of perindopril, a cardio-vascular medicine.
There is an Antitrust Armageddon in Europe between tiptop companies and Fourth
Reich(EU). Eurokleptocrats are willing to do anything in order to get kickbacks
from industry leaders. The European antitrust laws have the unfortunate
consequence of harming Europeans by chilling innovation and discouraging
competition. Instead of protecting competition, EU laws protect competitors who
give kickbacks to kleptocrats! Kickback is the lubricant that allows a European
industry to run smoothly! No European machinery can run without lubricant! Eppur
si muove! http://venitism.blogspot.com
At this stage, the Commission takes the view that the patent settlement agreements concluded by Servier with Niche/Unichem, Matrix (today Mylan Laboratories Limited), Teva, Krka and Lupin, as well as Servier's acquisition of key competing technologies were aimed at delaying or preventing the market entry of cheap generic versions of perindopril, in violation of EU antitrust rules.
European antitrust law is wielded most often by favor-seeking businessmen and their kleptocrat allies. Instead of focusing on new and better products, disgruntled rivals try to exploit the law by consorting with kleptocrats. EU officials routinely direct antitrust regulators to bend the rules in pursuit of political ends. In reality, the threat of abusive EC power is far larger than the threat of oligopoly. Eppur si muove!
In its stupid statement of objections, the Commission takes the preliminary view that Servier and generic competitors had agreed to limit competition to perindopril and that, as part of a comprehensive strategy, Servier had acquired competing technologies. These practices could have aimed at preserving Servier's position with regard to perindopril, which was about to reach the end of its patent protection.
The only viable definition of monopoly is a grant of privilege from the government. It
therefore becomes quite clear that it is impossible for the government to
decrease monopoly by passing punitive laws. The only way for the government to
decrease monopoly is to remove its own monopoly grants. The antitrust laws,
therefore, do not in the least diminish monopoly. What they do accomplish is to
impose a continual, capricious harassment of efficient business enterprise.
The Commission formed stupid objections against two specific sets of practices by Servier, which appears to be dominant in the market for perindopril. Firstly, Servier acquired scarce competing technologies to produce perindopril, rendering generic market entry more difficult or delayed. Secondly, Servier unduly protected its market exclusivity by inducing its generic challengers to conclude patent settlements. This behaviour, if established, infringes EU Antitrust rules that prohibit restrictive business practices and the abuse of a dominant market position (respectively Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union TFEU).
When a company is forward-thinking, proactive, innovative, and productive, it will
produce good products that customers want to buy. As a result, it will win a
large market share. If the company is much better than its competitors, it might
win most, or almost all, of the market. This is the case with Microsoft. It has
earned its market share by producing good products that customers want to buy.
The stupid Statement of Objections is addressed to the following entities: Servier SAS, Les Laboratoires Servier, Servier Laboratories Limited, Adir, Biogaran (all belonging to the Servier group), Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited, Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe BV, and Teva UK Limited (belonging to the Teva group), Unichem Laboratories Limited and its subsidiary, Niche Generics Limited, Mylan Incorporated and its subsidiary, Mylan Laboratories Limited (previously Matrix), Krka, d.d. Novo mesto, and Lupin Limited.
A company that wins a large market through its own productive efforts deserves
accolades. This is because justice, morally, tells us that we must reward the
good. However, to the government, a large market share is taken as evidence of
anti-competitive behavior, which makes the company a target for antitrust
action. This seems to be the motive behind the antitrust suits against Microsoft and Google.
The Commission's stupid competition inquiry into the pharmaceutical sector had indicated a number of structural and behavioural problems that potentially led to distortions of competition and delays to entry of new, innovative as well as cheaper generic medicines into the EU market. In its final report the Commission made a number of stupid recommendations to address these problems, and particularly emphasised stronger competition law enforcement especially with regard to patent settlements.
To punish the good because it is good is the most vile inversion of
justice conceivable. Yet this is the essence of antitrust, and this is exactly
what antitrust is doing to Microsoft and Google. Microsoft and Google are being targeted because they are good at their business, because they are successful, because they are competent. Nothing could be more unjust than this.
Following the sending of the stupid statement of objections to Lundbeck only a few days ago, today's sending of stupid statements of objections in the Servier case is a further stupid step in addressing the issues highlighted in the final report of the sector inquiry.
If you want to produce something in America or Fourth Reich, you'd better play
the game. Contribute to politicians' campaigns, hire their friends, go hat in
hand to a hearing, and apologize for your success. In a parasite economy no good
deed goes unpunished for long. Kleptocrats, seeing an opportunity to extend
their power and rake in some campaign cash and kickbacks, are circling like
sharks. When executives don't show up when kleptocrats invite them, all it does
is to increase kleptocrats' interest in what executives are doing and why they
do not show up.
A Statement of Objections is a formal step in Commission investigations into suspected violations of EU antitrust rules. The Commission informs the parties concerned in writing of the objections raised against them and the companies can examine the documents on the Commission's investigation file, reply in writing and request an oral hearing to present their comments on the case before representatives of the Commission and national competition authorities.
Kleptocrats are costing trillions of euros and dollars every year. The brilliant
minds of Silicon Valley of California and Redmond of Washington State, are going to waste time and energy on protecting their companies instead of thinking up new products and new ways to deliver them to consumers. Dragging smaller companies into the political swamps is just the latest diversion of West's productive resources into the unproductive world of political predation.
The duration of stupid antitrust investigations varies according to the complexity of the case, the number of markets and companies involved and whether they cooperate with the stupid Commission. If, after the parties have exercised their rights of defence, the Commission concludes that there is sufficient evidence of an infringement, it can issue a stupid decision prohibiting the conduct and impose a fine of up to 10% of a company's annual worldwide turnover.
European antitrust laws lead to huge corruption, because government officials
ask for kickbacks in order to erase the alleged violation. The standard kickback
in EU is 10% of the erased penalty! Many Greek officials were caught on tape
asking for the corrupt tithe! Many European political parties make up their
election expenses from kickbacks on antitrust cases! This is the worst possible
blackmail, where tiptop ethical companies are held hostage by European
kleptocrats. Eppur si muove!