← Back to context

Comment by throw31977

20 days ago

As an aside, I wonder why this wasn't discussed during the recent Greenland dispute. The US government basically legally pirate the drug, and it'd make a fairly large dent in Denmark's economy. It'd be a politically popular move too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_patent_use_(United_...

There is zero need to “pirate” ozempic (semaglutide) as there are already US alternatives on the market (Tirzepatide) and about to be more (Retatrutide) that outperform all other medications in the class.

Just have insurers stop insuring ozempic/wegovy but have them insure mounjaro/zepbound and it’s a done deal. No need to even ban it.

The responds of Denmark and or worse the EU invalidating US patents in retaliation is rather dangerous.

  • Dangerous? It'd be awesome. Think of the cheap products and services.

    I hope they abolish DMCA anticircumvention law.

  • Sure, but not as dangerous as a literal military showdown which was also on the table.

    • Lol, a military showdown where a few hundred people are killed might be horrible.

      Leave the US with an island it doesn't recognize as its own (because Congress wouldn't) and that isn't recognized as US by most of the rest of the world.

      Would economic ties between the US and Europe be broken as a result? Probably, but maybe everybody else decides that this will be resolved peacefully in the UN. And the can is kicked down the road, until Trump kicks the can.

      Because ending economic ties between Europe and the US would mean a massive depression on both sides. Massive assets lost and written off. Goodbye pension.

      Economic meltdown might be worse than a military showdown in the Arctic. Casualties from an economic conflict would be worse.

Two can play at the game, and the EU was probably closer to starting it.

The EU trade bazooka measure (Anti-Coercion Instrument) allows the EU to legally suspend patents, copyright, etc. if a member state is threatened, for example using tarifs. Which the US was a actively doing.

At the end of day, it doesn't matter the Danish government cannot surrender. Following WW2 it was made illegal for the government to do so. And voters would never support, not would Trump have the patience for Danish constitutional changes.

I'm quite convinced that:

(A) An invasion would have been a shooting matter. Even if the shooting would eventually come to an end.

(B) Denmark and most of EU and large parts of the world would never recognize an annexation.

(C) Congress in the US wouldn't recognize the annexation.

(D) EU and US would be both have entirely unnecessary and massive depression as massive assets would be seized or written off.

(E) Russia and China would be thrilled.

It was an allround shit show.

Trying to go further would have upended economic ties across the Atlantic. Causing massive economic depression on both sides.

But at the specific measures of parents: HUGE parts of US economy is Intellectual Property -- how dumb would the US have to be to declare IP laws invalid?