Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[HDGabor]

i-

Do you know any precedent/case other than Amarin Pharma, Inc. v. Hikma Pharmaceuticals?

Not a pharma case but ... MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913 (2005)

Although it acknowledged petitioners' (hereinafter MGM) assertion that "the vast majority of the software use is for copyright infringement," the court concluded that Grokster's and StreamCast's proffered evidence met Sony's requirement that "a product need only be capable of substantial noninfringing uses."
...
Because the appeals court found respondents’ software to be capable of substantial noninfringing uses and because respondents had no actual knowledge of infringement owing to the software’s decentralized architecture, the court held that they were not liable. It also held that they did not materially contribute to their users’ infringement because the users themselves searched for, retrieved, and stored the infringing files, with no involvement by respondents beyond providing the software in the first place.

(emphasis mine)

If the amount of prescription is unusual(ly high) it confirms existence of substantial non-infringing use

How does it confirm that those prescription is not for infringing use, but for non-infringing use?

As I said "I am not 100% sure how do you mean it" ... furthermore my reply was confusing also. Let me rephrase ... re.

Is it "unusual" that such a high amount of GV is prescribed? I understand that Marine indication itself is not "unusual", but the amount of prescription could be "unusual".

The "unusual" is applicable for the "substantial" (non-infringing use) analysis, determination. ... for the MARINE indication. Is it substantial or does not?

Best,
G