(Side note: there's also a securities law question. Founder goes on TV and says their drug, approved for men, might work on women. No particular basis other than the idea that the systems are basically the same, apparently no testing ongoing or even specifically planned. The stock goes through the roof. Is this ok?)
Thursday, August 25, 2011
This is a documentary of average quality with a few very sharp moments, probably worth watching if you're interested in the subject matter (medicalization of women's sexuality). But there's a non-patent IP angle! Part of the story is how the documentarian created edited sequences of porn clips for women to watch in the course of clinical testing for one drug. So, is it fair use? Is the purpose "get women aroused for science" the same as "get viewers aroused" under the first fair use factor?