This is not the website of Abbott Laboratories nor is it affiliated with them in any way. This is Kumar Patel's non-commercial parody website in criticism of Abbott Laboratories.

HIV Access

HIV Access

Abbott is dedicated to providing worldwide access to its HIV medications to those who can afford them. »Read more

News

Features

MEDICINE TO DIE FOR!

It is a well known fact that smoking can cause lung cancer yet it is legal to buy, sell and use Tobacco.  In the quest for ruthless profit, Abbott's/CAT's drug Humira is no different. Like the warning sign on a cigarette packet, Abbott admits "Serious side effects, which sometimes lead to death, have happened in patients taking HUMIRA" .   Furthermore, effects to the exposure of the active ingredient Adalimumab include serious and sometimes fatal blood disorders , serious infections including TB (tuberculosis) and infections caused by viruses, lymphoma and solid tissue cancers, serious liver injury, demyelinating central nervous system disorders, cardiac failure and death .   Abbott would say that some of these side effects are rare but would that concern you if you were a victim?   Also, how rare are these fatal side effects?  For example, if the clinical trials were done on 5,000 people and 2 died,  then a simple calculation of 5 million people taking the drug would equate to 2,000 people dying in order to cure a non-fatal condition.  

The health warnings on packets of cigarettes did not help the tobacco giants escape from class actions, does a similar fate await  Abbott and Cambridge Antibody Technology?


" Humira - 700 deaths

Admitting the officially recognised rate of 0,93 % of deaths and taking into consideration the statements from Abbot in Portuguese Court that 100.000 patients had taken this medicine, we must conclude for an estimated number of 930 deaths (100.000* 0,93 %) within a period of two years, of which 75% or that is 698 deaths were directly provoked by Humira ."....  ©2005 Citizen Ship eu-citizenship.com

Legal Redress

"If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury or illness while taking Humira, you may be eligible to seek compensation for your losses and suffering through a Humira lawsuit."   Copyright © 2007, Oshman & Mirisola, LLP 42 Broadway 10th Floor New York, NY 10004


ACT UP Storms an Abbott Drug Manufacturing Facility. Protestors Denounce 400% Price Hike on Key AIDS Drug
"Abbott Lies, We Die: Drop the price of Norvir!"  In 2004 Abbott increased the price of its AIDS drug Norvir (ritonavir) by 400%, even though the drug was approved over eight years earlier and had garnered over $1.3 billion in sales by then.
People in Dozens of Countries Around the World Demand End to Abbott's Greed
AbbottsGreed.com says that Abbott Laboratories is denying people living with HIV/AIDS access to its AIDS drug Kaletra—charging out of reach prices, refusing to allow generic versions of the drug and now refusing to even sell the drug in some countries. This second-generation drug is a life-saver in wealthy countries but the company is saying the poor don’t deserve it!
Thailand takes on drugs giants
The Thai government's decision to break the patents on two Aids drugs and one heart drug, so it can offer them to all Thai citizens, is a bold move, which has put the country on a collision course with the big pharmaceutical firms.
Abbott Laboratories threat to have a Baltimore Sun's reporter beaten by the "philly mob."
"I called David Pacitti, vice president of global marketing for Abbott Laboratories' cardiac-plumbing division, to ask why he seems to want goons to beat me up in the newspaper parking lot. "Don't you have connections in Baltimore?????" Pacitti e-mailed a subordinate regarding a January column I wrote on heart-artery stents. "Someone needs to take this writer outside and kick his ass! Do I need to send in the Philly mob?" Pacitti and other Abbott execs apparently don't care for suggestions that their expensive vascular devices often do patients little good and that a star Baltimore doctor took their encouragement to be "truly outstanding" a bit too much to heart."-Baltimore Sun.
Standing Up To Abbott's Decision to Withhold Registration and Marketing of Life-Saving Medicines
Abbott is now doing what drug companies have long threatened to do when developing countries use lawful flexibilities to access more affordable generic medicines - it is threatening to take its marbles and go home. Unfortunately, however, Abbott is not playing marbles, it is playing a deadly game of Pharmaceutical Apartheid, where drug companies withhold access to affordable life-saving medicines in a perverse effort to preserve intellectual property rights at all costs.

View more features...

This is a non-commercial parody website in criticism of Abbott Laboratories inc. 

This website is not affiliated with Abbott Laboratories or endorsed or sponsored by them in any way. If you are looking for the website of Abbott Laboratories, this is not it.

The external links on this website are for information purposes only and there is no commercial connection between this website and either Abbott Laboratories or any third parties.

I also put Abbott Laboratories Inc (US), Pattishall, McAuliffe, Newbury, Hilliard & Geraldson LLP (US law firm), Abbott Laboratories Ltd (UK) and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP (UK law firm) on express notice of the relevent laws and case laws.


Passing off:

The remedy for passing off is intended to prevent unfair trading practices /unfair competition . Neither I, nor this website, are a competitor of Abbott Laboratories Inc or a subsidiary of.

Article 10bis of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property confers on the member states to make provision for Unfair Competition .

Case Law:

Reckitt & Colman Products Ltd v Borden Inc (Jif Lemon case) [1990] RPC 341
Perry v. Truefitt (1842)

The basic test for claiming passing off is for the claimant to satisfy the “classic trinity” and it is also of utmost important to remember that mere confusion which does not lead to a sale is not sufficient to satisfy one of the requirements.

Trademark Infringement:

First Council Directive 89/104/EEC Article 5 Rights conferred by a trade mark.

1. The registered trade mark shall confer on the proprietor exclusive rights therein. The proprietor shall be entitled to prevent all third parties not having his consent from using in the course of trade :

The Trade Marks Act 1994 ("the 1994 Act")

10. - (1) A person infringes a registered trade mark if he uses in the course of trade a sign which is identical with the trade mark in relation to goods or services which are identical with those for which it is registered.

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 40/94

Article 9: Rights conferred by a Community trade mark

1. A Community trade mark shall confer on the proprietor exclusive rights therein. The proprietor shall be entitled to prevent all third parties not having his consent from using in the course of trade :

Case  Law:

British Telecommunications Plc & Ors v One In A Million Ltd & Ors [1998]

“The motive of the appellants was to use that goodwill and threaten to sell it to another who might use it for passing-off to obtain money from the respondents.”

"if the name could be used for a legitimate purpose, it was not a vehicle of fraud and injunctive relief would not be granted unless it was established that the defendant either threatened to pass-off or was, with another, part of a common design to pass-off.”

"The mere creation of an "instrument of deception", without either using it for deception or putting it into the hands of someone else to do so, is not passing-off.  There is no such tort as going equipped for passing-off.  It follows that the mere registration of a deceptive company name or a deceptive Internet domain name is not passing-off."


Julius Sämann Ltd & Ors v Tetrosyl Ltd [2006] EWHC 529 (Ch) (17 March 2006)

“62. The national court must also confirm whether the use made in the present case is one "in the course of trade" and "in relation to goods" within the meaning of Art.5(1) of Directive 89/104 (see, inter alia, Arsenal Football Club, [40] and [41]).”


Declaration of non-infringement / Remedy for groundless threats of infringement proceedings.

Article 21 of the Trade Marks Act 1994 and Article 92 of COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 40/94.  


LEGAL NOTICE:

Dear Mr Christopher Forsyth, Partner at Freshfields, Bruckhaus, Derringer,

Please therefore refrain from initiating frivolous and groundless UDRP administrative proceedings as such proceedings equates to a groundless threat of infringement proceedings via 4(k) and 5 of the policy and also please refrain from making other frivolous and groundless threats in the form of cease and desist letters to either myself, the registrar or the hosting company.

It would also be a good idea for you to return the domain name Abbott-Laboratories.com to me before we next meet in the United Kingdom High Court. Oh, I forgot! You and your clients are too scared to go back into court against me and that is why you have left your Part 20 claim against me pending for the last 5 years!!! I'm ready whenever you are!

I do like what you have to say to the media: "Because the English all have a sophisticated and slightly cynical sense of humour, they are not confused by these sites. When you see a parody website you know full well that it is one," says Chris Forsyth, an intellectual property partner at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, the leading law firm - The Telegraph.

Some of the content on this website is credited to Abbott Laboratories Inc, Abbott.com. (Copyright © 2011 Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, Illinois, U.S.A.)