Talk:Evergreening

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 October 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Fauncet (talk · contribs) / Faunce, Thomas Alured This user has contributed to the article.

2008-10-20 "new patent ... prevents the manufacture of ... the product"

I can't follow the logic of the sentence

When the original patent expires, a new patent is in effect, which prevents the manufacture of generic versions of the product.

Won't the new patent only prevent manufacture of products that incorporate the new features of the new patent, and have no effect on products that only use prior art described in the lapsed patent? In this case, "prevents the manufacture of generic versions of the product" should be changed to "prevents the manufacture of generic versions of the updated product" --Yagibear (talk) 06:48, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2007-10-5 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)
Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.
Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 07:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Faunce is an academic expert on pharmaceutical evergreening, particularly in Australian context. Articles are appropriate. If an academic helps define a field is that a COI?217.41.235.6 (talk) 20:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyvio

A significant part of the introduction is taken verbatim from http://law.anu.edu.au/StaffUploads/236-Art%20ANZHP%20Linkage%20Evergreening.pdf, without quotes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evanescent7 (talk • contribs) 23:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still confused...

Sorry, but I've just read the article and I don't feel informed about what evergreening actually is. I think it would be great if there were a section, near the top before the for and against explations, that spelled out (in a step-by-step manner perhaps?) how the process of evergreeing actually happens. All I know now is what the opening sentence says - that there are methods of doing it - but not what "it" specifically is. Witty lama 06:57, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An example?

Is this what AstraZeneca did with Esomeprazole (Nexium) after the patent expired on Omeprazole (Prilosec)? Change up the chemical compound a bit, claim some differences in how it works, file a new patent and they're good for another 20 years. Who cares if any other drug company can make the old product because the new one is *better*. Bizzybody (talk) 02:33, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]