As it happens, in cases where the FDA approval has eaten a big chunk out of the effective life of the patent, drug patents have been extended for two years or so. This happened, for example, in the case of Claritin. But now the manufacturer is back in Congress asking for yet another extension on the Claritin patent.

The overall purpose should be kept in mind. The monopolist's only reasonable expectation is a reasonable return on his investment. If the effective life of the patent was shortened slightly by the approval process, but the manufacturer has nevertheless made money hand-over-fist, he is not harmed by letting the patent expire on time. He has already gotten his reasonable return.

I'm sorry I jumped to the conclusion that you agreed with Jack forever-less-one-day-is-a-"limited"-time Valenti in favoring perpetual copyright.

T.