Skip to main content
Article
SORRELL V. IMS HEALTH INC.: SOWING MISCHIEF IN COMMERCIAL SPEECH PROTECTION+
Southern Law Journal (2015)
  • Edward J. Schoen, Rowan University
  • Joseph S. Falchek
Abstract
By better understanding the physician's prescription preferences, the detailer uses his office visit with the physician more effectively to recommend new or different drugs for patients, provide drug samples, and persuade the doctor on the advantages of the recommended drug. Because detailing is expensive, pharmaceutical companies and their detailers focus their attention on pitching higher-profit brand-name drugs protected by patents, rather than generic drugs.10 Three data mining companies, denied a lucrative source of income, and an association of pharmaceutical manufacturers of brand-name drugs, denied a valuable marketing tool, brought suit in Vermont contending PCL violated their First Amendment rights and requesting declaratory and injunctive relief.* 11 The federal district court denied relief.
Publication Date
April 1, 2015
Citation Information
Edward J. Schoen and Joseph S. Falchek. "SORRELL V. IMS HEALTH INC.: SOWING MISCHIEF IN COMMERCIAL SPEECH PROTECTION+" Southern Law Journal Vol. 25 Iss. 1 (2015) p. 1
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/edward-schoen/10/