I don't even understand how a company can be given exclusive rights to a 62 year old drug. It shows that company rights to drugs are really, underneath it all, just corporate rent-seeking.
Yes, it seems to beat the purpose of having rights, which if I am correctly is to protect companies and stimulate innovation by giving them the room and time to invest in R&D and then make a return on their investment. That's not what this is about anymore. Now the argument is to collect money for future investments, but it can't be right that people can't afford their medication now just so that in the future other people possibly can (assuming the new developed medication is at an affordable price of course).