Analyze Abbott Laboratory's strategic response to compulsory licensing Article

Analyze archimandritet Laboratorys strategic rejoinder to absolute licensing - Article ExampleAbbott laboratory strategically responded to compulsory licensing by publicly announcing that it is going to withdraw the unfinished applications for selling current medicines in Thailand. Applications for seven medicines were withdrawn by Abbott. The medicines which Abbott withdrew their applications were Aluvia, Brufen, Abbotic, Clivarine, Humira, Tarka and Zemplar. It decided not to introduce spic-and-span drugs in Thailand since the actions displayed by Thailands giving medication did not respect patents. Several advantages and disadvantages can be associated with abbot laboratorys strategic response to compulsory licensing (Baron, 2008).Strategic response employed by Abbot Laboratory proved to be advantageous since it created room for negotiation. Abbotts strategic response made Thailand government to realize how important the organization is in pharmaceutical industry. Its strate gic response made Thailand government to repeal several complaints. This therefore made world health organization to intervene and discussed with Abbott on how to market its products in developing countries, including Thailand. Abbotts strategic response also had some weaknesses. The response had a serious movement on patients. It deprived innocent individuals who seriously required lifesaving drugs. The strategic response also showed that Abbott laboratory lacks amicable responsibility and only mind about maximizing its profits.From the discussion, it is clear that Thailand easily issued compulsory licensing for Abbott laboratory product, causing the organization to angrily react. Abbott angrily reacted to the action by stopping introducing new medicines in Thailand. This strategic response created room for negotiation and caused serious effects on patients and companys