HIV/AIDS is one of the diseases that has plagued Africa and has taken millions and millions of lives. South Africa is one of the worst affected countries by this plague. There have been endless issues surrounding the issue of patents and the violation of all these patents by the South African country and this being the case, a majority of the various patented pharmaceutical companies that is suing the South African government. The government violated all these patents as a strategy to develop and manufacture medical products that are sensitive and helpful to the infected and affected citizens.
The lawsuit is a legal strategy that the company should take, as the country has directly taken over patented material and developed, near counterfeit drugs using the skills, a specification that illustrates that the country is not only violating the patent but also violating the legal requirements that the country requires. If the company chooses to sue the government, similar to all other pharmaceuticals that are suing the nation, it will be doing what the law requires. The government did no legal measure such as requesting the various companies that produced the anti-virus medication and hence they are suing the South African government for the same violation.
In the legal terms, the company has the right to sue the government and basing on this argument it should truly do it. On the contrary, people are dying, totaling up to millions each year, from the same nation. The antivirus medication is what most people would term as affordable, but on the contrary, the South African nation is not one of these nations. Plagued by poverty and increased number of deaths that these people experience on an annual basis, its only logic that the government would institute such as a quick and illegal measure.
The ethical dimension of this story demands a different take. The measure taken by the South African government could easily escalate and be adopted by all other nations. As such, pinning a legal requirement or a suit to the country would be wise. The country is also affecting the profitability of these nations and this undeniable. However, is it always about the money? Is the antivirus the only drug that Merck & Co. produces, such that the mere loss from the drug will drain the company the will to live and survive? Does Merck only view the profitability from a plague that is quickly killing all the people? What would the world view of the company if it had these drugs’ production halted to replace them with the $7,000 dosage sold to the people that barely make $365 on an annual basis? What would the stakeholders view of such a move? What about the American Government; how would they view such a move?
With all these considerations being put in place, the management should consider the ethical implications of such a lawsuit. Undoubtedly, the customers would get the knowledge of the company’s action, and how exactly would …