| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.
''Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.'', No. 10-779 131 S.Ct. 2653 (2011), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a Vermont statute that restricted the sale, disclosure, and use of records that revealed the prescribing practices of individual doctors violated the First Amendment.
==Background==
In 2007, Vermont passed the Prescription Confidentiality Law which required among other things that records containing a doctor's prescribing practices not be sold or used for marketing purposes unless the doctor consented. The law was a response to a Vermont Medical Society resolution stating that using the prescribing history of doctors in marketing was an intrusion into the way doctors practice medicine.〔(''Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.'', Amicus Brief ) Vermont Medical Society, p. 6, "VMS found that using physicians’ prescribing histories for marketing purposes is 'an intrusion into the way physicians practice medicine.'"〕〔Office of the Attorney General of Vermont, June 23, 2011. ( Press release: Supreme Court Strikes Down Vermont Prescription Privacy Law ). Quote: "Vermont enacted the Prescription Confidentiality Law in response to the Vermont Medical Society’s unanimous resolution in 2006 that the sale and marketing use of doctors’ prescribing practices without consent is 'an intrusion into the way physicians practice medicine.'"〕 The Vermont Medical Society had found that the marketing efforts of pharmaceutical companies used in large part the data of individual doctors' prescribing patterns, sold to the companies by pharmacies without the doctors' consent〔(''Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.'', Amicus Brief ) Vermont Medical Society, p. 1, "...marketing activities of pharmaceutical companies aimed at changing the treatment decisions that physicians make for their patients were driven in large part by data of individual physicians’ prescribing patterns obtained from pharmacies without physician consent"〕 and successfully lobbied the Vermont legislature to enact the law.〔(''Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.'', Amicus Brief ) Vermont Medical Society, p. 2, "VMS spent much of the 2007 Vermont legislative session championing the law that is the subject of this challenge."〕
Data mining companies and pharmaceutical manufactures contended that the law violated their First Amendment rights and sought declaratory and injunctive relief against Vermont officials. The United States District Court for the District of Vermont denied relief; the plaintiffs appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit which reversed, holding that the law violated the First Amendment by restricting the speech of the companies without adequate justification. Vermont's Attorney General appealed to the The Supreme Court, which granted certiorari to resolve the contradiction of a ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which had overturned similar laws in New Hampshire and Maine, concluding that the laws regulated economic conduct. not commercial speech.〔Cartwright-Smith L, Lopez N. Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.: data mining of pharmacy records and drug marketing as free speech. Public Health Rep. 2013 Jan-Feb;128(1):64-6. PMID 23277662 (PMC 3514723 )〕
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc.」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|