Just how did Novartis "abuse" the Gleevec patent? On what grounds/method can the author say that the price is "excessive"? As the author states, drug development is a collaboration between academic researches (w/ both public and industry funds) and industry (who contribute the vast majority of funds, if not all, and resources to ultimately bring the drug to market). The high risk and cost of drug development is understandably a cause for hesitation on the part of industry management, hence it is not uncommon for researches on either side to serve as advocates for a drug. Exactly what is the "acceptable" price of Gleevec, or for any drug? I challenge anyone to come up with an answer that is acceptable by all and/or won't hinder future drug development. Those who do not understand the complex nature and history of drug development will always find drug prices to be "too high".