It's very simple. What Apotex did was a stunt for publicity. They announced a price for a triple formulation and were unable to sell it for about two years. They then halved the price—it went from 38¢ a tablet down to 19¢. I may be off by a penny. They halved the price, made a single sale through Rwanda, and then they said they're not going to do this again. That's why it worked the one time.
Now, all the things that Rachel has mentioned, all the desiderata she has for amending the law, I have to say this: they have been tried in other countries. There are over 30 countries that have CAMR-like legislation: all 27 countries of the European Union, plus Norway, plus Switzerland, plus South Korea—I know I'm missing a few--China and India. Over 30 countries have this sort of law and many of them have no expiry date on the compulsory licence. Many of them do have what you'd call a one-licence solution. Nearly all of them don't have a list of countries that are intended recipients or a list of diseases to which it's limited.
And guess what? How many times have those 30-plus laws been used in foreign countries? Total? Zero. Zero invocations for zero treatments for zero patients for zero public health benefit. So this experiment has been tried abroad and I'm sorry to say it doesn't work. I wish it did, but it just doesn't. I know a lot of people will be angry hearing this, but these are the data. Unless you can say the data are wrong, end of story. Honestly.