Talk about a David VS Goliath story! A corporation that was just valued at 9 billion dollars is in "prayor for relief" and is taking a speck of dust sized company to court and asking for a federal court ruling because that company is selling eye vitamins based on a study that was funded with tax payer dollars? Pretty sad b and l.... pretty sad!!
A 9 billion dollar company should be able to absolutely CRUSH this other small mom and pop shop operation. How many marketing people are behind the preservision brand? An entire sales force dedicated to selling to eye care professionals! Unbelievable that this company is so desperate that they hired one of the largest IP firms in the world to go after this small little company. Talk about having zero faith in your product and zero faith in the people that make up your organization.
Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't the Areds and Areds Two studies conducted by the National Eye Institute with tax payer dollars? So how did B and L get a patent on these formulas? If tax payer dollars were used to study the effectiveness of the various different ingredients being studied shouldn't the tax payers have a right to choose which brand they want to purchase? Is the National Eye Institute and the Federal government trying to help patients with macular degeneration or are they trying to help B and L? By giving B and L a patent is virtually creating a monopoly in B and L's favor. Some of you may say, "well B and L donated product to the national eye institute and they have a right to the formula." My response is that donation was probably a very nice tax write off not to mention some added publicity.
Patients with macular degeneration deserve the right to choose from a variety of different brands of the Areds and Areds two products. Having multiple brands to choose from creates fair competition rather than one company receiving an unjust patent and controlling and manipulating the price of only one available product that they own. Let the best brand win. sales, and marketing people win!
This is a perfect example of how a corporate giant is trying to bully the small guy. I am rooting against you losers! Oh by the way, it's spelled zeaxanthin not zeaxanthine! When one of the key ingredients your claiming ownership to in your patent and court forms is spelled wrong it makes you and your high profile lawyer look like greedy, uneducated, idiots! Just saying!
A 9 billion dollar company should be able to absolutely CRUSH this other small mom and pop shop operation. How many marketing people are behind the preservision brand? An entire sales force dedicated to selling to eye care professionals! Unbelievable that this company is so desperate that they hired one of the largest IP firms in the world to go after this small little company. Talk about having zero faith in your product and zero faith in the people that make up your organization.
Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't the Areds and Areds Two studies conducted by the National Eye Institute with tax payer dollars? So how did B and L get a patent on these formulas? If tax payer dollars were used to study the effectiveness of the various different ingredients being studied shouldn't the tax payers have a right to choose which brand they want to purchase? Is the National Eye Institute and the Federal government trying to help patients with macular degeneration or are they trying to help B and L? By giving B and L a patent is virtually creating a monopoly in B and L's favor. Some of you may say, "well B and L donated product to the national eye institute and they have a right to the formula." My response is that donation was probably a very nice tax write off not to mention some added publicity.
Patients with macular degeneration deserve the right to choose from a variety of different brands of the Areds and Areds two products. Having multiple brands to choose from creates fair competition rather than one company receiving an unjust patent and controlling and manipulating the price of only one available product that they own. Let the best brand win. sales, and marketing people win!
This is a perfect example of how a corporate giant is trying to bully the small guy. I am rooting against you losers! Oh by the way, it's spelled zeaxanthin not zeaxanthine! When one of the key ingredients your claiming ownership to in your patent and court forms is spelled wrong it makes you and your high profile lawyer look like greedy, uneducated, idiots! Just saying!