Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S.:Targets Internet broker selling from Canada(broker tells Feds to shove it)
Richmond Times Dispatch ^ | Sep 10, 2003 | THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Posted on 09/10/2003 4:20:41 AM PDT by putupon

Edited on 07/20/2004 11:49:32 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

MIAMI - The Justice Department ordered Rx Depot to close up shop, as the Bush administration moved to shut down a chain of Internet stores that promise cheaper drugs from Canada.

In a letter yesterday to Rx Depot's President Carl Moore that was obtained by The Associated Press, the Justice Department said it would sue Moore unless he agrees by tomorrow to shut down the company's 85 storefronts.


(Excerpt) Read more at timesdispatch.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: feds; freetrade; healthcare; morelaws; prescriptiondrugs; regulations; rules; socialism
"Just because this is the federal government, this does not scare me," he said.

I like this guy's attitude.

"to stop them from importing drugs that pose a serious threat to the public health."

A serious threat to Bush's Socialized Medication plan is more like it.


Tax collector being tarred and feathered
during Whiskey Rebellion

1 posted on 09/10/2003 4:20:42 AM PDT by putupon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: putupon
Now begins the payoff to the drug companies for their
decades long paid-junkets for the judiciary and congress.

Billions and billions of dollars have been paid for "justice".

2 posted on 09/10/2003 4:24:59 AM PDT by Diogenesis (If you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: putupon
What happened to free trade? Could someone sarcastically say that we are protecting American pharmecutical jobs? What about the poor druggist at Rite Aid? He could lose his job to cheap foreign imports.</sarcasm>
3 posted on 09/10/2003 4:47:38 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: putupon
Seems passing strange that drugs sent to Canada from the US and imported back in are suddenly "dangerous". While the example given is made to sound especially firghtening, note that the drug co.s are trying to limit their sales to Canada to prevent there being any excess inventory.
I agree with the other poster concerning junkets and donations: Its payback time.
4 posted on 09/10/2003 5:18:51 AM PDT by Adder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
What happened to free trade?

Really, what about NAFTA? Funny how that doesn't count on something Bush wants to turn over to the HillaryCare plan (again, paid for out our pockets).

5 posted on 09/10/2003 5:31:31 AM PDT by putupon (Tagline? You wanna' a tagline? I gotcha' tagline right here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: putupon
The problem is that they do not need to use FDA regs.

The manufacturer of a trademarked product has the right to control importation of its product.

So the same law that allows a US Customs agent to grind off the nameplate of the $5000 camera you bought for $3500 in Japan when you were there allows US Customs to confiscate or destroy pills.

BTW I once had to buy oxoflacin (a powerful antibiotic). I calculated that it was more expensive than gold on a per-ounce basis.

6 posted on 09/10/2003 5:52:47 AM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
What happened to free trade? Could someone sarcastically say that we are protecting American pharmecutical jobs? What about the poor druggist at Rite Aid? He could lose his job to cheap foreign imports.

Would somebody please remind me what NAFTA means?
Shouldn't it me NAAFTA? (the second "A" is for "almost")

7 posted on 09/10/2003 6:08:41 AM PDT by Publius6961 (californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: putupon
The real complaint here is that US Manufactured FDA approved drugs were ordered and promised by the company and instead foreign made drugs from companies not FDA approved were swapped instead.

More like a case of fraud than anything.
8 posted on 09/10/2003 6:23:55 AM PDT by Chewbacca (Stay out of debt. Pay cash. When you run out of cash, stop buying things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ikka
The manufacturer of a trademarked product has the right to control importation of its product.

Huh?

Trademark protects names. Nothing more.

This has to do with federal law which regulate the importation of drugs. Given that most of these drugs have been exported from the U.S. beforehand, this whole thing is a bit silly. The government should not really be in the business of protecting profit margins. Let the drug companies regulate it themselves.

9 posted on 09/10/2003 6:35:10 AM PDT by B Knotts (Member, League of Right-Wing Crazies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
Trademark protects names. Nothing more.

It appears that the SCOTUS has changed the was this is handled:

See this case. So, I am wrong.

I agree with you that the FDA should not be involved so long as it can be shown that the drugs in question were manufatured in the USA.

10 posted on 09/10/2003 6:46:17 AM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson