The previously reported Plavix drug story gets more interesting (link here). The Economist suggests a few alternative explanations for why a patented drug holder and a competitive generic maker would do a deal rather than compete; that happened in the Plavix case, (although it was subsequently overturned by the government).

One reason might be to "to delay its introduction of a cut-price product". A second might be that "the cost and legal uncertainty associated with patent trials are simply too great." Finally, it may be that the firm may know that "its patent was mistakenly awarded, perhaps because the purported breakthrough was too minor or obvious."

David Balto, a former official at the Federal Trade Commission, is quoted as saying, "Branded pharmaceutical firms have been stretching the limits of what deserves a patent, and the courts are just catching up."

It seems they have a long way to go.

Monopoly loves to expand. Pharmacists around the world are finding ways to preserve their exclusive right to sell drugs. Do you want to buy "Plan B," a "morning after" contraceptive hitherto sold only as a prescription drug in America. Rather than allowing it to be dispensed freely, the FDA forced a "voluntary”"accord on Barr Laboratories, the drug's maker, for it to be sold from behind the pharmacist's counter. If an identity check reveals the purchaser to be under 18, Plan B will still require a prescription; if the buyer is 18 or over, the pharmacist can dispense it freely. This landmark decision could prove to be the thin edge of a very big wedge. The arrival of Plan B may herald the emergence of a class of pharmaceuticals unknown in America: behind-the-counter (BTC) drugs (link here)”.

Enough said.

The Economist magazine (though it calls itself a newpaper) reports on the recent US airwave auctions to provide additional band to wireless providers (link here). The bottom line seems to be that competition remains in the hands of existing firms.

"Despite hopes that a new national operator might emerge, the spectrum largely went to existing wireless firms (with the exception of a consortium of cable companies partly backed by Sprint).... The result is that today's broadband duopoly between the fixed-line telecoms operators and the cable companies is now moving into the wireless sector." Great news.

AFP reports that (link here)

Indian state Kerala Education Minister M.A. Baby said his government would promote the use of open source Linux operating systems along with Microsoft in high schools in Kerala, India's most literate state which has a population of 31.8 million.

"We are against monopolies of multinational companies in any sectors," he told AFP. "So we would like to provide equal opportunity for both Linux and Windows-Microsoft operating system in the school curriculum."

But "ideologically I support Linux and Free and Open Operating Systems for IT enabled-education in schools," he added.

Open source advocates will be heartened by this development, modest though it is, given the size of the world software market. Still, we will have to wait and see which operating system wins out. Competitive dynamics seem to favor the innovator. So far, Microsoft has stayed ahead by continuing to innovate and provide advantages to those who have already adopted its software.

There is pretty widespread agreement that the patent examination system is broken - too many meaningless patents that then are used by trolls for purposes of blackmail. In addition to public efforts to improve the existing system, there are private efforts. Among the most notable is wikipatents, a "wikipedia" like effort to provide community review of patents. Particularly with respect to prior art, where the patent office has not proved particularly knowledgeable, this potentially can lead to a significant improvement in the awarding of patents by providing greater transparency and informational input to the system. Go check it out.

In a case similar to one in the EU, South Korea's Fair Trade Commission found that Microsoft had violated its anti-trust law and must strip out Windows Live Messenger and Media Player, as well as pay a $34 million fine. XP will now be available stripped or with a link to a site with downloadable competing applications (link here). Whether this applies to sales of the forthcoming Windows Vista remains unclear.

A step in the direction of more competition, this does little to loosen Microsoft's lock on the operating system market. Most first-time computer buyers will take the easy course, using what comes on the new machine. Having learned to live with it, relearning a different OS is not a competitive option, and Windows retains the advantage from the many applications written for it arising from being the first to market.

The New York Times updates our earlier report on the drug patent dispute between generic maker Apotex and Bristol-Myers Squibb which claims a valid patent for Plavix, a blood thinner (link here).

A federal judge has now ruled that the challenged patent is valid but went on the allow Apotex to distribute what generic it has already put in the wholesale channel. Apotex will appeal the patent judgment. Bristol Myers expects a big cut in its profits this year as prices for the drug have been sharply cut.

More to come.

For a brief primer on how not to run a successful business see the business week article on the new Amazon downloading service. The short version: going out of your way to sell a not very good product at a high price is not a proven formula for business success.

Finally, there's the problem of how to watch these videos on the television, which remains the preferred place to watch for most people. Amazon's service, like others, allows a backup DVD of the digital files to be made, but that backup won't play in regular DVD players thanks to digital rights restrictions. A Windows Media Center PC can be cabled to a TV, but only through a relatively low-resolution S-video line.

Hmmm...a special DVD player or a "Windows Media Center PC" cabled to a TV. Sounds like a winner to me.

Although not strictly focused on issues of monopoly on intellectual monopoly Techdirt provides great coverage of IT issues of public interest - including patent and copyright issues.

The issue of software patents, particularly in regards to open source software, is increasingly contentious. According to Information Week,

The opponents of proliferating software patents who see them as a threat to open source software may finally get their day in court--the U.S. Supreme Court.

The critics have been itching for this opportunity for years. But the Supreme Court rarely reviews patent cases, which usually are decided by federal appeals courts. The top court, however, has agreed to hear three patent cases this fall, though only one relates to the impact of patents on open source software.

The full Information Week article can be read here

And stay tuned.