RESTRICTIONS ON DATA MINING BY PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES HELD TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY A NEW HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COURTThis case is posted for information and research purposes. The district court case addressed in this summary was overruled by the First Circuit Court of Appeals in December 2008. You may find the court of appeals decision in our database, please see summary titled Restrictions on Data Mining by Pharmaceutical Companies Held to Be Constitutional by the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
A number of State legislatures have introduced bills aimed at regulating data mining with the purpose of protecting individuals’ privacy. The U.S. Federal District Court in New Hampshire ruled that restrictions placed on data mining performed by pharmaceutical companies contained in the Prescription Privacy Law, 2006, are contrary to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution (IMS v. Ayotte, 490 F.Supp. 2d 163 (D.N.H. April 30, 2007)).
The following questions have been addressed in this article:How did New Hampshire’s Prescription Privacy Law restrict data mining?
What marketing tactics used by the pharmaceutical companies gave rise to a perceived need for passage of the Act?
Have other States attempted to pass laws that are similar to the Prescription Privacy Law?
What has been the response of the AMA to the litigation with respect to prescription privacy laws?