Cipla
Answer 1: Merriam-Webster defines Pirate as:“someone who illegally copies a product or invention without permission”Humanitarian as: “a person promoting human welfare and social reform”In the present context of the case, both the definitions seem to fit adeptly.Lens of a pirate: CIPLA never invested aggressively a penny in the R&D and used to re-engineer the drugs developed by the foreign players. He abided by the law of the land at the cost of gazing eyes in the international market. The tension aggravated when CIPLA decided to enter the African market with its three-tier pricing and thus undercutting the profits of big players like GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol-Myers, Merck, Pfizer and others. These companies were now forced to lower their prices (to the extent of 50-80%).
The Indian law patented the method of preparing a drug and not the drug itself. Hence, CIPLA was in no violation of the law only for the fact that the patent law was a result of lobbying at the corridors of power by CIPLA. Keeping aside the AIDS crisis and lives of millions of people and looking purely from the business angle CIPLA was no less than a pirate robbing the MNC’s of their profits. CIPLA was into business of offering drugs at cheaper rates in the markets where the MNC’s had their substantial market share. Its business model favoured high margins and it tweaked the process a bit and reintroduced the same drugs under different names.   Lens of Humanitarian.The owner of Dr.Hamied , also funded the centre for palliative care in Cancer as a part of its commitment to its corporate humanitarian objectives. Bringing in the concern of saving lives and making antiretroviral drugs available to the not so better segment of the society, CIPLA was no less than a robin-hood. The US Dugs major enjoyed huge profits over the drugs which, the clinical trials of which were funded by US government. The death rate in AFRICA began to decline as late as 2007 primarily because the drugs were not as affordable in Africa as in U.S. Patents lead to monopoly in the market and thus in order to incentivise their investments in R&D, drugs are charged higher. CIPLA was against this philosophy of monopolies and thus charged lower prices to make drugs available to the low-income segment of the people. This forced Pharma majors to cut down their prices too. Thus, by selling competition in the market, CIPLA was an ethical business leader.