Thanks for the link. The relevant part in the video is at 57:06 where the doctor speaking states that the pharmaceutical companies didn't need the patent system before FDA regulations. What mattered was being first-to-market because even when there was a second-to-market, the first-to-market still kept 80% to 90% of the customers. It was only because of the FDA regulations, which made the costs so high to develop new drugs, that the patent system became so important. In other words, get rid of the FDA at the same time you get rid of patents and we will have safe drugs, cheaper and faster. I think this is the nail in the coffin for intellectual property. Thanks again.
I see. So what you're saying is if we didn't have the FDA or patents, market share is determined by who is first to market, right? Thus, the motivation would be all about being first to market, and
we know for certain that such a motivator would never ever inspire a company to risk getting a drug or treatment out there before their competition could if it might result in ill effects down the road. Cool.