top | item 22611910

Company threatens to sue volunteers who 3D-printed valves for coronavirus aid

209 points| danso | 6 years ago |theverge.com | reply

140 comments

order
[+] jagger27|6 years ago|reply
$11,000 for a plastic valve. Unreal. No wonder hospitals are always stretched to the limit when they're being gouged like this.

Think of it this way, a hospital could buy 10 valves or hire a physician for a year. Are these valves typically re-used? Are they going through them faster because they don't want to risk infecting other people?

[+] Ididntdothis|6 years ago|reply
I wouldn’t feel too bad for the hospitals. They are happy to mark up prices by an outrageous amount. My company does medical devices. One device goes for around 20k to the hospital. I have heard that the hospital often charges 80-100k for the device plus the cost for doctors and facility which is often another 50k or more.
[+] Narkov|6 years ago|reply
It's not $11,000 for a plastic valve. It's $11,000 for a plastic valve and the many thousands of hours of R&D, testing, validation, certification and risk.
[+] tathougies|6 years ago|reply
Part of the cost is certainly regulatory / insurance underwriting approval, isn't it?
[+] zokula|6 years ago|reply
Late stage capitalism
[+] ardy42|6 years ago|reply
> A medical device manufacturer has threatened to sue a group of volunteers in Italy that 3D printed a valve used for life-saving coronavirus treatments. The valve typically costs about $11,000 from the medical device manufacturer, but the volunteers were able to print replicas for about $1 (via Techdirt).

What's the name of the manufacturer?

[+] enilakla|6 years ago|reply
Right. I'm wondering the same. Enough bad pr and this will change quickly.
[+] waiseristy|6 years ago|reply
Where did this company "threaten" to sue? All I can find is the following source

"Now, despite the country battling an unprecedented health crisis, there is potential for a legal battle with local media reporting that the manufacturers of the valves are refusing to share their blue print for further production and could potentially sue for copyright breaches."

So they may have the option to sue?

[+] capableweb|6 years ago|reply
> However, when the pair asked the manufacturer of the valves for blueprints they could use to print replicas, the company declined and threatened to sue for patent infringement, according to Business Insider Italia. Fracassi and Ramaioli moved ahead anyway by measuring the valves and 3D printing three different versions of them.

Which links to https://it.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-manca-la-valvola-..., in Italian, and I don't understand Italian.

[+] yellowapple|6 years ago|reply
Right on the heels of SoftBank-owned Labrador Diagnostics LLC suing over COVID tests: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22598988

Which company is suing over the 3D-printed valves? We need to name and shame. If we're unwilling to call out monopolists putting profits over even human life, then we, too, are complicit.

On another note, I'm of the increasingly-strong belief that patent suits should be deemed automatically dismissed if the "infringement" is a response to either an inability or unwillingness of the patent holder to actually use that patent productively (i.e. produce something using that patent). In this case, if the original manufacturer is out of stock, 3D printing replacements should be fair game. Likewise, if we don't have enough testing kits, making and distributing more should be fair game.

[+] hirundo|6 years ago|reply
> we are not going to spread the drawing.

This part seems less than optimally ethical. If it's a choice between helping other hospitals to save lives and to avoid additional legal liability, this seems like a good hill to go bankrupt on.

But...if someone slipped the file to me I wouldn't publish it either. So I can't fault them for being as faulty as me.

[+] Recursing|6 years ago|reply
They said they would print them for free for any hospital that needed them, I assume they would also send the drawings if asked by a hospital
[+] dbcurtis|6 years ago|reply
At least in the US, I believe so long as you do not sell or transfer items, you can make them for your own use without licensing the patent. To win a law suit, the company would have to "show harm". They can't. They lost exactly zero sales.
[+] nourse|6 years ago|reply
This is the opposite of true in that US patent law forbids even personal use but most European jurisdictions permit it.
[+] dredmorbius|6 years ago|reply
False:

35 USC 271: Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/271

[+] pnw_hazor|6 years ago|reply
In the US a patent holder can absolutely exclude you from making or using their patented inventions.

However, the US gov can infringe at will without any court orders or special laws.

If a US gov agent (any low level CDC or health agency employee could do it) told the hospital to print valves, there is nothing the patent holder can do about it except get paid for the value of the valves sometime later.

[+] FpUser|6 years ago|reply
I think you are wrong. The key I think is "for use". If you made patented item and are using it you can get sued. Of course nobody really gonna chase an individual but officially you can not.
[+] slimsag|6 years ago|reply
But in this case, it'd be for the hospital's use, so they would have lost sales technically and it'd be easy to show harm.
[+] kichik|6 years ago|reply
They should hire them instead. Maybe together they can cut production costs so this life saving equipment doesn't have to be sold for $11,000.
[+] capableweb|6 years ago|reply
I'm sure the cost of these valves are not in the production but in the research of coming up with the design to produce and other things before production. So they price in order to recoup already spent money and get some profit on it too. For sure it doesn't cost them 11k to make.
[+] jariel|6 years ago|reply
"Maybe together they can cut production costs so this life saving equipment doesn't have to be sold for $11,000

It's not the unit cost, it's the R&D that's expensive.

The $5000 screwdriver definitely is a thing, if you need 5 Engineers to design it but only ever make 5 of them, to be used on the Space Shuttle for example.

[+] rolph|6 years ago|reply
i think they like it to cost $11,000 and do things to keep it fixed that way
[+] Turing_Machine|6 years ago|reply
> life saving equipment doesn't have to be sold for $11,000.

Production costs don't really enter into it. The actual breakdown is probably more like:

Production costs: $25 FDA approval: $100 million dollars

[+] landryraccoon|6 years ago|reply
This article feels like low quality clickbait to me. The company isn’t even named, and there’s no source given for the claim that a lawsuit was threatened.
[+] amayne|6 years ago|reply
This. There is insufficient details for the level of outrage people are displaying.
[+] baltbalt|6 years ago|reply
I call bullshit.

Their is no way this valve cost $11,000. A quick google search for PEEP valves for respirators sow that they sell for a few dollars, 20 at most.

It seems unlikely that any company would sue in such circumstances, it would be a PR nightmare.

If the story was true prices would most likely be listed in euros.

When this 3d printed valves story appeared a few days ago those exact figures were cited on Reddit as a joke.

How they ended up presented as "Facts" on TheVerge is anyone's guess.

[+] oldandtired|6 years ago|reply
Having seen the prices charged for drugs and how they then calculate future prices (after the R&D costs have been recovered), I have a very sceptical view of any comments that say we need to consider R&D and regulatory cost recovery before complaining about the prices being charged for anything in the medical technology field. Having also discussed what was seen by someone I know who left the corrupt world of advertising to go to the medical technology world, I also consider anybody saying the same about recovery of R&D and regulatory costs to either being a liar or deluded. The gentleman in question went back to the advertising world because they were innocent children compared to the corruption and price gouging that went on inside the medical technology industries.

There is a captive market here and the seller can sell at any price they want and make any markup they want because they can. There are some very honourable people and companies who do not price gouge in the field. But it seems that these are a very small minority.

Now mind you, this kind of price gouging occurs anywhere there is a captive market. But some industries are more susceptible to it than others.

[+] ineedasername|6 years ago|reply
I'm all for letting companies have a limited monopoly on innovations, but this just seems short-sighted. It's the kind of behavior that gets nations to pass something like "medical necessity" legislation allowing them to infringe patents under certain circumstances, or impose profiteering and price gouging statutes, or re-thing all of their health care systems' compensation levels for equipment & procedures. It's the sort of thing that can raise public ire against the entire medical device industry.
[+] Maarten88|6 years ago|reply
People are quibbling about money while millions of lives are at stake. We need tens of thousands of these medical devices and we need them fast. Like in the coming weeks.

If companies who suddenly find themselves in a strategic position don't get what they need to do, then the Government needs to take control using emergency powers, and use any available production capacity in the country to ramp up production, fast.

We'll also need to do many other things. We should adopt a wartime mentality, focus on solving the problems at hand, and stop wasting time. At least in Italy they get this now.

[+] frollo|6 years ago|reply
I'd like to see them try. To sell this kind of critical equipment to Italian hospitals you have to guarantee there will be no shortages even (especially) in critical conditions. They failed to uphold their part of the bargain with the country and at this moment both the government and the people are very short on patience. Probably, if they even try to sue the volunteers they are going to lose all their contracts with Italian hospitals in a matter of days.
[+] zozbot234|6 years ago|reply
This is adding nothing new over the previous BusinessInsider piece. It's just reporting (again) that this company asserted patent rights after the hospital and the 3D-printing firm requested the design in .STL format due to being unable to secure supplies in an unprecedented emergency. Which is what we knew already.
[+] sliken|6 years ago|reply
The world needs IP rules like the FCC (USA) has for Amateur Radio.

The rules are basically if lives are in danger, anything goes.

[+] copperx|6 years ago|reply
Same for the FAA, right?
[+] jacquesm|6 years ago|reply
Let them threaten. This is newsworthy when they actually sue. It would also require them to go on the record, with their names and the names of their executives and lawyers on full display. My money would be on that not happening.