Question Presented
Congress passed the Copyright Act of 1976 to protect individuals and organizations under the fair use doctrine from being held liable for copyright infringement. A natural health organization with a stated goal of protecting consumers from destructive biochemical medication has produced a parodic advertisement that is critical of a rival pharmaceutical company. Under the fair use doctrine does the Copyright Act of 1976 protect health companies from producing parodic advertisements that criticize the negative effects of a pharmaceutical brand’s product?
ARGUMENT
I. Helping Eradicate Risky Biochemicals’ advertisement for its product HerbaTab is protected under the fair use doctrine and 17 U.S.C. § 107 because the advertisement is an educational parody criticizing Ackman Pharmaceuticals’ biochemical product Ambizac.
The United States Constitution
…show more content…
Furthermore, HERB intended to criticize and educate the public about the harmful biochemical that Ackman was selling. As Angela Burr stated in an article about the two different campaigns, “People should know about the adverse effects of Ambizac . . . [w]e feel it is our duty to make the public aware of this.” R. at 24. HERB is a health organization with a stated goal of educating the public about the benefits of natural medicines. Id. at 27. By employing Congressional lobbyists and investing in companies that produce “health-related products,” HERB is dedicated to eradicating risky biochemical medications. Id. With this proven track record, determining the motivating factor behind HERB’s advertisement is not difficult. As Burr stated, “It’s really a brilliant campaign. [HERB’s] informed the public of the evils of chemically produced medicine with humor.” Id. at 24. HERB, following its corporate mantra, produced the HerbaTab advertisements to make the public aware of the shortcomings of
In July of 2010 in Miami, Florida, Richard Smith, a 79-year-old dialysis patient was admitted to the ICU after a dialysis appointment left him with severe shortness of breath. The following day after being admitted the patient complained of an upset and the doctor had prescribed him an antacid. Uvo Ologboride, the nurse taking care of Mr. Smith, gave him a deadly dose of a drug called pancuronium, which is a drug that induces paralysis, instead of the antacid. 30 minutes later the patient was found unresponsive, but they were able to revive him. Unfortunately when he was revived, he was left brain dead to which did not settle well with his family. When the patient son had came in he had found his father unconscious, unresponsive, and on a respirator. When looking over the chart to try and figure out what happened it had said his dad had just been resuscitated 10 minutes earlier and the nurse had pretty much told him to go and speak with the doctor. Upon speaking to the doctor he was told the nurse had given his dad the wrong medication which lead to his current state of his condition. The nurse was not able to be reached and spoken to about what happened on that fatal day but from what the doctor had explained was the nurse had grabbed a
In Melody Peterson’s “Our Daily Meds” , the history of marketing and advertising in the pharmaceutical industry is explored. The first chapter of the book, entitled “Creating disease”, focuses on how major pharmaceutical companies successfully create new ailments that members of the public believe exist. According to Peterson, the success that these drug manufacturers have experienced can be attributed to the malleability of disease, the use of influencial people to promote new drugs, the marketing behind pills, and the use of media outlets.
... Officer on Proposed Trade Regulation Rule: Concerning the Advertising of Over-the Counter Antacids. Washington, D.C.: Federal Trade Commission, 1979.
Within my group’s pro-Adderall campaign, we promoted adderall use among high school students who were struggling with a relatively poor attention span, inability to focus, and were thus unproductive in their schoolwork. We created a video commercial that follows the same tactics pharmaceutical advertisements used, described in Dumit’s Drugs for Life. Dumit emphasized how ambiguous pharmaceutical ads were in order to reach a broader audience, and reinforced that all people experienced the stated symptoms to some extent. The companies only needed a small fraction of the viewers to self-diagnose themselves and purchase the product. Likewise, we targeted students that were experiencing heavier workloads coming into high school, and understood that the majority would struggle in maintaining attention throughout long hours of lectures and worksheets. We used this strategy and targeted all students, both a male and female, in the video since in this period in history it would be offensive if we directed the ad specifically towards males, following the stereotype of the “problematic boy”.
...pecially with the use of DTC advertising, to such a wide range of afflictions greatly increased their consumer base, but one of them proved to be deadly. In 1999, four years after Lilly sent study results to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration showing Zyprexa didn’t alleviate dementia symptoms in older patients, it began marketing the drug to those very people, according to documents unsealed in insurer suits against the company for overpayment.(Applbaum, 248). Soon after it began to be used in those suffering from dementia, there were studies produces that showed an increase in death rate among elderly patients taking Zyprexa. In January of 2009, Eli Lilly and Company, who produced the drug, ended up settling the lawsuit and agreed to pay $1.415 billion which was one of the biggest corporate settlements in the history of pharmaceutical companies (Applbaum, 237).
With marijuana is becoming legal in some states for medical reasons, other states are still questioning how marijuana can be beneficial and even a problem. In “The Truth about Medical Marijuana” by Carrie Shortsleeve, published in 2013 on the website Men’s Health, Shortsleeve describes how tetrahydrocannabinol or THC, found in marijuana, can be used for medical benefits. In the passage, she explains how the immune system and brain are affected by THC especially if the substance is high in dosage. When Dr. Mahmoud ElSohly, Ph.D., “the director of the University of Mississippi’s Marijuana Project,” injured his back, he begins to research what benefits marijuana has when using the drug as medicine, and Shortsleeve shares this with people who maybe considering medical marijuana. Shortsleeve uses statistics, in depth research, and real- life situations to show how some people trust marijuana as medicine; even though, some of these people were once against medical marijuana.
The young professionals are not only the focal point in the center of the image, they are also considerably larger than any other element, taking up almost two thirds of the illustration. This drives home the point that younger individuals truly are targeted by this ad. Additionally, the RJ Reynolds company gave the primary slogan “Salem Spirit” a very large and easily legible font, ultimately making it the only text in the image truly discernable from a distance. Clearly, the advertisers want viewers to place greater importance on these two items than on anything else in the picture. The truthful information, in other words the Surgeon General’s Warning in the lower left part of the image as well as the potentially harmful contents of each cigarette just above it, is noticeably smaller and thus deprecated. This coerces the target audience into focusing on the positive impact that Salem cigarettes will have on their lives while deceptively drawing attention away from the
In Melody Peterson’s “Our Daily Meds” , the history of marketing and advertising in the pharmaceutical industry is explored. The first chapter of the book, entitled “Creating disease”, focuses on how major pharmaceutical companies successfully create new ailments that members of the public believe exist. According to Peterson, the success that these drug manufacturers have experienced can be attributed to the malleability of disease, the use of influencial people to promote new drugs and the efficient usage of media outlets.
This is a compare and contrast rhetorical analysis paper focusing on a print billboard advertisement and television commercial. The billboard advertisement is centered on a smoking death count, sponsored by several heart research associations. In addition, the television Super Bowl commercial illustrates how irresistible Doritos are, set in an ultrasound room with a couple and their unborn child. The following paragraphs will go in depth to interpret the pathos, logos, and ethos of both the billboard and the television advertisements.
Pharmaceuticals are arguably one of the most contentious of all goods and services traded in the market. While medicines are as much a necessity as foods and water, they require more technical expertise and official approbation in the manufacture. Above all, they carry a moral weight that most market products do not (The Economist, 2014). This idea of moral can be linked to the recurring debate over whether a good health (which is represented by medicines, in this case) should be considered a basic human right, or just a normal commodity. A large portion of such controversy actually lies in an existence of drug patents: should we promote for longer-lasting patents or should we have their duration shortened?
3Walker, Hugh: Market Power and Price levels in the Ethical Drug Industry; Indiana University Press, 1971, P 25.
...harmacyregulation.org. 2013. Revalidation | General Pharmaceutical Council. [online] Available at: http://pharmacyregulation.org/education/revalidation [Accessed: 25 Nov 2013].
Sharpe, Katherine. “Medication: The Smart-pill Oversell.” Nature: International Weekly Journal of Science. Nature Publishing Group. 12 Feb. 2014. Web. 7 March 2014.
There has always been controversy about marijuana and the affects it has on health and the issue of legalization. Some people believe it is very destructive to one’s health, and yet others feel the complete opposite about it. Is Marijuana truly harmful to one’s health? “Marijuana, the Deceptive Drug”, written by George Bierson, was published in the Massachusetts News. In this article, Bierson determines that marijuana is harmful in many ways. He seems to think that it damages the brain, the reproductive system, and also contributes to the halt of production in the immune system. Bierson also tries to persuade the reader that marijuana is a “gateway drug” that leads to larger drugs in the future. However, by conducting research of my own, I have come to the conclusion that Bierson’s article simply lacks truth.
For instance, physician Mark Kraus, a member of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, opposes the idea of legalizing marijuana because of its medical benefits (Kraus, par. 1). In a piece titled “The Dangers of Legalizing Marijuana: A Physician's Perspective,” Kraus debates that the use of marijuana does not have the therapeutic purposes that the public attributes it. Kraus believes cannabis should not be a conventional medicine, because it has not passed through the “rigorous scrutiny of scientific investigation” that other drugs have to pass through. Kraus states that the public only evaluates marijuana legalization based on the testimonies of users; although marijuana may give these patients temporary relief, the long term effects are not so positive, sustains Kraus (par.