Pfizer has made a fortune with Viagra. About which there should be no surprise. Because more than half of men may eventually suffer from ED, the drugs have a ready market. But Pfizer couldn’t have earned money off Viagra if it hadn’t been willing to fight for it in court. Indeed, it has taken the offensive at times and hunkered down on defense at other times. As usual, some of the said court cases stand out considerably more than the others.
Ten of the largest Viagra lawsuits in history are listed below:
1: Pfizer brings a defunct missile lawsuit against a man
Because Viagra treated sexual dysfunction, it became easier for Pfizer to sell the little blue, diamond-shaped pills. It would not have reached such a renowned status in such a short amount of time if successful and effective marketing had not been implemented. Others wanted to capitalize on the efforts of Pfizer without ever being Pfizer. One of them, Arye Sachs, thought it would be a brilliant idea to drag a retired missile emblazoned with the phrase “Viva Viagra” across Manhattan and then park it in front of the corporate headquarters of the pharmaceutical company.
Pfizer Thought the Joke Wasn’t Very Funny
Those with a sharp interest can probably tell that Pfizer did not treat the matter as light. According to Reuters, the pharmaceutical business filed a case against Sachs because it perceived the decommissioned missile outside its premises, rather than Sachs’s outdoor advertising service, would have been mistaken for an advertisement for its product. A judge presiding over the matter later ruled in Pfizer’s favor, and it was clearly visible that he didn’t find Sachs’s claim of free speech credible either.
2: Pfizer Targets Questionable Websites
Back in the early 2000s, Pfizer decided to take a shot at shady sites promising to sell Viagra at low prices. At least some of the impetus reportedly came from the fact that a poll cited by World Trademark Review showed that 25% of American men believed it was responsible for all the Viagra-themed spam. Something that completely annihilated Pfizer’s reputation. Ultimately, the rogue sites sold more than just counterfeit drugs with too little active ingredient. Their products sometimes included lead along with other toxic substances. There was no easy method through which customers could distinguish between legitimate and counterfeit Viagra. That made these rogue sites potential PR nightmares for Pfizer.
A few believed it was swimming against the current.
Some people at the time considered that Pfizer was only wasting its time by pursuing a legal way out for the issue at hand. According to them, as the weapon it chose for this task was slow and cumbersome, it was never going to manage to knock down more than a fraction of the thousands of dodgy websites selling counterfeit medicines. However, Pfizer believed that following them would be helpful in two ways. It first demonstrated that the people who operated such facilities could not act anyhow and get away with it. Second, it was also hoping that by making its activities known to the public, the latter would be aware of this menace and less likely to become a victim of these pseudo-medications.
3: A Man Files a Priapism Lawsuit
For example, a Forbes contributor reported that a former inmate, Dustin Lance, filed a lawsuit and demanded $5 million against the prison authorities after he allegedly suffered from excruciating priapism. The report added that he ingested an unidentified drug. After that, Lance complained of an uncomfortable, sustained erection. Unfortunately, the other inmates ridiculed him, and for this reason, he could not be brought to the medical staff for several days. He has not clarified what exactly he ingested. But the Forbes author did note that given its list of known side effects includes priapism, one possible candidate is, in fact, Viagra.
A Serious Issue Is Priapism
Priapism usually gets a humorist treatment. For readers who relish that kind of information, let one say that it is a serious complaint and those who are affected by the complaint should seek medical intervention without further delay. In most cases, with ischemic priapism, this is the commonest variety of priapism, wherein the blood from the penis is not flowing. This failure of circulation means there is a lack of oxygen, which could result in permanent damage to that part. Also, priapism usually indicates some serious problem, which should be identified in order to stop the deterioration of its underlying cause.
4: EU Bans Stimulating Drink with a Name That Seems Identical
Those who wished to capitalize on the publicity of Pfizer without necessarily being Pfizer themselves were not unique to the United States alone. If the pharmaceutical business wished to sell its medicine worldwide, it had to be prepared to wage war against any individual who infringed on its trademark. Abcor, for example, is a Polish company that tried to market beverages under the brand name of Viaguara and their application was denied because it was similar to Viagra.
Viaguara was found to be too similar to Viagra by an EU court
Those interested should note that the issue involved some back and forth. Eventually, however, the European Trademark Office rejected Viagra for two reasons. First, Viagra was generally known in most of the European Union. This led to a greater concern about customer confusion. Second, comparison of Viagra and Viagra showed some partial overlap. Indeed, the latter would involve libations. The point was that these would be stimulating beverages. This had a problem since Viagra was not therapeutic to life-threatening diseases. To the contrary, it was designed for treating erectile dysfunctions and hence made it lively and vivacious in meaning.
5: Pfizer Wins Some Chinese Trademark Cases But Loses Others
Pfizer battled the Chinese government in various court battles over its trademark. Sometimes it won, as when a Chinese court ordered three Chinese medicine makers to stop using its distinctive diamond shape and shade of blue before being forced to pay a fine and apologize. More often, Pfizer lost.
Because “Wei Ge” is a popular nickname for Viagra, Pfizer sued. Unfortunately, as was shown by the fact that its official names for Viagra are “Wan Ai Kie” and “Wei Er Gang,” it never looked to trademark it. Because of this, the manufacturer of electronic products got away with trademark squatting-a good example of how a small mistake may have long-term implications on a company.
6: Pfizer Marketing: AIDS Healthcare Foundation Files Lawsuit
The nonprofit organization AIDS Healthcare Foundation takes it to its mission to fight against HIV/AIDS. It is mostly known to provide health care to the individuals suffering from the disease. However, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation has also made a name on the legal front. For instance, it led an effort to require the use of condoms in filming adult movies in Los Angeles County. In much the same vein, it has opposed the construction of any new housing and the capping of prescription prices. In 2007, Pfizer was taken to court by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation over the marketing of its drug Viagra.
The way Pfizer presented Viagra to the public upset the organization
The AIDS Healthcare Foundation complained to KPBS that Pfizer’s public presentation of Viagra was misleading. It contended the pharmaceutical business positioned it as something men suffering from erectile dysfunction should take to cure that problem, not as something every guy should take to improve his sex. For this reason, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation maintained that Pfizer was actively encouraging the recreational use of Viagra, leading to unsafe sex practices that spread HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.
7: Pfizer’s Experience with Patent Lawsuits Is Varying
Patents on pharmaceuticals have a finite lifespan. Pharmaceutical businesses are so encouraged to conduct research, and future price reductions for the general public will still be possible. Having stated that, there is a good chance that this procedure will entail lawsuits. Given that multiple court cases were involved in the introduction of generic Viagra, Pfizer is a prime example.
In Canada, Teva prevailed
For instance, Pfizer sued Teva, a US-based generic pharmaceutical company, but later decided to settle. At the same time, it was proven to be thoroughly defeated in a related case where the Canadian Supreme Court voided its Viagra patent in 2012. In this regard, CBC reports that this was because Teva successfully argued that Pfizer’s patent was invalid.
In other words, so long as they can prove that they have something new, Canada gives the pharmaceutical companies a monopoly for 16 years. The catch is, they must disclose how they made it. Since Pfizer could not do this, the Supreme Court of Canada voted unanimously to invalidate it because the company tried to game the system. That ruling enabled Teva to launch a generic version of Viagra, which no doubt weighed in the case in the United States.
8:Due to claims of cardiovascular conditions, people sue Pfizer
Even after approval, drugs can have unforeseen side effects. It’s no wonder that this can result in numerous lawsuits. This process is no exception when it comes to viagra. Many individuals sued Pfizer at one time or another because it seemed there was an increased danger of heart attacks and strokes.
The majority of these lawsuits were dismissed.
According to Drugwatch, the majority of these cases were dismissed. This is due to fresh data showing that heart attacks, strokes, and other cardiovascular diseases were not directly caused by Viagra. Rather, research indicated that many of the individuals who experienced similar symptoms were already undergoing therapy for heart-related issues. Because of this, they frequently used nitrate medications, which, when paired with Viagra, caused their blood pressure to drop below safe limits.
Most of these cases were dismissed, according to Drugwatch. This is because new data came out to show that heart attacks, strokes, and other cardiovascular diseases did not have a direct connection with Viagra. Instead, the studies showed that many of the people who developed similar conditions were already receiving treatment for heart-related problems. For this reason, they often took nitrate drugs, which, combined with Viagra, lowered their blood pressure below acceptable levels.
9:Suits filed against Pfizer for alleged vision loss
Pfizer received criticism in the mid-2000s when it came to light that Viagra users ran the risk of losing their sight with the use of the medication. It was said that this was due to how it affected the blood supply to the optic nerve – it decreased – and ultimately caused issues with it. The FDA forced an update on the label after the finding. Soon enough, Pfizer was dealing with a host of cases that cropped up, all claiming to have been affected by this issue. Ironically, the pharmaceutical firm came out clear in this class-action suit almost to the point where, at the beginning of the 2010s decade, it had more or less been cleared of this crisis.
This one was won by Pfizer by discrediting the study.
Those suing Pfizer made several mistakes. What is important, however, is that the pharmaceutical company was able to discredit the author of the study and expert witness, Dr. Gerald McGwin. CBS reported that Pfizer found major flaws in the way the researcher conducted his research. His forms, for instance, did not match his reported results-a fact that should raise some mental red flags for any reasonable person. The drug company did not prevail in its attempts to get the study fully retracted, but it still wanted to go even further.
10. Skin cancer claims lead to lawsuits against Pfizer
Disturbing disclosures from a study have in the past landed Pfizer into legal trouble. A spate of reports claimed that a 2014 study found men who took active ingredients in Viagra had an increased risk of developing melanoma. An avalanche of hundreds of individuals filed billion-dollar lawsuits against the pharmaceutical company.
Pfizer Appears to Have Triumphed Once Again
This eventually worked out in Pfizer’s favor and its co-defendant Eli Lilly in the early 2020s. According to Courthouse News Service, the reason a court ruled in their favor was because no three expert witnesses on behalf of the plaintiffs were able to convince him that their products were responsible for the melanoma. Since the lawsuits have indeed been dropped, Pfizer, together with Eli Lilly, appears to be out of trouble in this respect.
Stay in touch to get more updates & alerts on VyvyManga! Thank you
