7

Currently there are big news articles about some guys that printed some valves for a hospital in need as the supplier wasn't able to provide the needed parts fast enough.

The media says that the supply company now wants to sue the guys for creating the valves themselves and that the valves are worth 11k$. (See i.e. here, here or here(BBC))

I can think for sure of some patents and copyrights that don't allow them to copy these valves or other reasons to sue them, but I cannot think of these valves being worth 11k$.

All articles I found stated that the valve was sold for 11k$ by the company, if mentioned. No other value was called nor the 11k$ declined. They only call out the price difference of 1$ (guys) to 11k$ (company).

These valves seem to be used for a Venturi Oxygen Mask (see linked article) and can be used only 8h before they need to be cleaned by medical process (disinfected by chemical/uv/heat) and that the guy's part cannot be used for that.

I understand that the professional part is more expensive due to development costs and special materials, but does that legitimate such an expensive product? Or is this just a media hoax?

This question is not about why they sue them, only the stated price of 11k$.

chicks
  • 219
  • 1
  • 2
  • 10
Chrᴉz remembers Monica
  • 179
  • 3
  • a possibly relevant side thought for the sueing aspect: While I don't know about Italian patent law, German patent law has clauses that allow courts to order compulsory licensing under certain conditions, and the patent holder not satisfying domestic demands is among them. There's also a clause that would allow the government to void a patent due to public interest. In both cases, the patent owner must be equitably compensated, though (and in the first case, the producer i.e. the 3d printing guys would have had to ask for a patent). – cbeleites unhappy with SX Mar 18 '20 at 09:54
  • @cbeleitesunhappywithSX "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,[...][The guys]moved ahead anyway by measuring the valves and 3D printing three different versions of them." [See here](https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/17/21184308/coronavirus-italy-medical-company-threatens-sue-3d-print-valves-treatments), they asked for it but got declined. A court or court order is mentioned nowhere. Moreover, iIt's 11k$ of value for each valve, not compensation. – Chrᴉz remembers Monica Mar 18 '20 at 10:14
  • If Italian patent law in that respect is similar to German, this means that a court may not uphold much of the patent owner's claim *if* they sue. Compensation and damages AFAIK also both aren't about retail price since the company also doesn't have production costs for the parts they don't make. How much of the 10 k€ (if that is the retail price - I got the impression that the news releases should be counted as 1 source since in the end they all cite the same doctor) this I have no idea. – cbeleites unhappy with SX Mar 18 '20 at 10:21
  • 2
    I looked up some numbers from press releases of Dräger, a big manufacturer of respiratory devices from Northern Germany [not the one in question here]: they just published their balance for last year and report an EBIT marge of 2.4 %. Another 2 press releases have bits and pieces that we may consider for plausibility check here: they say that they just got audited according to the newest regulations for medical device manufactuers, and invested 35 M€ over 3 - 4 years to get to that level. (Yes, they were an up-to-date medical device provider already before that). My conclusion is that it may – cbeleites unhappy with SX Mar 18 '20 at 10:26
  • Hard to imagine that someone has a patent on a valve. – gnasher729 Mar 18 '20 at 10:26
  • 2
    very well be that a large part of the production costs for these valves are overhead costs such as such sterile production facilities and audits which are high per piece since these parts are not something manufacured in the millions. – cbeleites unhappy with SX Mar 18 '20 at 10:35
  • 2
    @gnasher729: why? - in particular wrt such medical devices I can imagine well that respirator technology is an ongoing development topic. Here's one example btw: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8695599B2/en – cbeleites unhappy with SX Mar 18 '20 at 10:40
  • 1
    Another point that would be relevant for the variable production costs: I read in a newspaper article about the same Dräger company that while they are manufacturing respirators now as fast as they possibly can, right now they are limited in their capacity for testing the devices before they are delivered. Similar testing procedures *may* also be required for parts like the valves. So the 3d printed parts are good right now: if they don't work (either directly, or because they come at a higher risk of infections, ...) the patient is not much worse off since the alternative there now is sure... – cbeleites unhappy with SX Mar 18 '20 at 10:47
  • 1
    ... death. The normal suppliers of medical equipment are nevertheless held to the usual very high standards for reliability and performance of their products. – cbeleites unhappy with SX Mar 18 '20 at 10:49
  • 1
    Although, one confounding factor for faulty valves not being much worse, NPR had an interview recently with one of the CDC people and the question of whether COVID-19 can be spread in an aerosol fashion was raised. Generally, it does not, which is making the spread a little less scary. One of the few cases where it can happen is leaks in high pressure apparatus such as respirators. A loose valve can potentially result in a spray of particles that will linger in the air. – Sean Duggan Mar 18 '20 at 13:07
  • With US patent law, they *have to* sue. Failure to defend the patent can nullify the patent rights. Nothing would stop them from settling for signing an NDA about the settlement and not charging the copiers a thing. – user53816 Mar 20 '20 at 04:28
  • @psaxton Or they could sell the printers limited-time use of their patent for...$1? – simon at rcl Mar 20 '20 at 11:47
  • Is this a case of printer ink? Sell the system at a loss and make it up on supplies? – Loren Pechtel Mar 22 '20 at 01:48

1 Answers1

2

The Verge article you cite from the 17th March 2020 was updated on the 18 March 2020:

But in an interview with The Verge, Romaioli denied they’d received threats. [...] While earlier reporting said the original valve cost over $10,000, Fracassi also told Fast Company that this number was inaccurate.

So, the claim appears to be false.

Oddthinking
  • 140,378
  • 46
  • 548
  • 638
  • Why quote the "threats" part? (Confuses me.) // In all, that is one slightly iffy source that simply states 'original dollars < 10000'. For a device that these fairy tale heroes made for ~1$ material cost. A theoretically still possible markup of 9998$ sounds just as stunning as the _exact_ original claim itself? If the cost for the valve from the OE manufacturer is above, say 50$, I'd prefer to modify the flat "false". But medical/pharma do charge ridiculous amounts… So, how much does/did the original supplier charge? – LangLаngС Aug 01 '22 at 15:02
  • 1
    @LangLangC: Since the 3D printed parts were not equivalent to the OEM valves, particularly in the area of material compatibility with disinfectant agents, you cannot use the $1 cost of printing materials as an estimate of the materials cost for the actual valve. – Ben Voigt Aug 01 '22 at 15:07
  • @BenVoigt That might mean, https://www.sja.org.uk/first-aid-supplies/specialist-equipment/medical-gases-and-oxygen-masks/oxygen-masks/31-Venturi-Oxygen-Valve/ selling for example for measly _0_.49£ might be bought in bulk and then amount to X $s when ordering a palette… Granted that reporting on Covid stories was and is mostly bull anyway, getting to the bottom of this outlandish sounding claim in details retracing the steps of exaggeration might be _quite_ illuminating? More so than "appears false"? – LangLаngС Aug 01 '22 at 15:07
  • In the end, we might see a scare story of 'scarcity in generalised hysteria', with a certified piece in short supply, and entrepreneurs stepping in for PR (and real samaritanism?) providing the scarce piece, without certification, violating licences etc, but: _hauling it in when 'needed',_ even at a perhaps _increased price per piece?_ – LangLаngС Aug 01 '22 at 15:10
  • @LangLangC: I quote that part to give the understanding that the whole premise of the original story was completely undermined by the purported source denying it. I decline to wildly speculate on the actual price nor the actual costs nor the motivations of the various players; I don't need to to answer the question. I do not wish to write a general essay on how errors spread in media. I don't know what "scarcity in generalised hysteria" or "hauling it in" means. – Oddthinking Aug 02 '22 at 06:31