| Abstrakt: |
Policy debates at the intersection of patent law and pharmaceutical innovation have become increasingly polarized, often ending in a stalemate between seemingly incompatible goals of pharmaceutical innovation and access. Professor Karshtedt’s body of work at this intersection navigates the partisan divide by carefully probing the assumptions and practices of patenting in pharmaceutical markets to identify opportunities for incremental improvement in both innovation and access. His Article The More Things Change: Improvement Patents, Drug Modifications, and the FDA exemplifies this approach, identifying an opportunity to nudge private sector incentives to innovate into closer alignment with public health gains through modest regulatory interventions.1 In doing so, the Article offers a pathway through policy intransigence by offering a market-incentive based rationale for expanded agency authority, focusing on what should be a shared goal of improving the decision making of patients, prescribers and payors. The impact of Professor Karshtedt’s work stems not only from the insights in articles like The More Things Change, but also from the standards he set for himself as a scholar. Professor Karshtedt’s work exemplifies the kind of thoughtfulness, analytical precision, and willingness to pursue a line of inquiry with patience, persistence, and intellectual intensity to which we should all aspire. His approach to patent law draws from both law and science, from experience working in a startup company, a law firm, working for a judge, and within a law school, and from the perspectives of a patent holder, a patent practitioner, and a patent scholar. Perhaps most importantly, both in his work and in his intellectual life Professor Karshtedt was always in thoughtful conversation with people and ideas around him. This essay is both a tribute to Professor Karshtedt’s work and an invitation to draw lessons from his approach to scholarship and to building academic community that may serve well in navigating contested terrains such as the current debates at the intersection of patent law and pharmaceutical policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
