According to Reuters, Bayer’s Monsanto unit sued COVID-19 vaccine makers Pfizer, BioNTech, and Moderna in Delaware federal court on Tuesday, January 6. The lawsuits allege these companies misused messenger RNA technology Monsanto pioneered in the 1980s for strengthening mRNA in crops to stabilize the genetic material in their vaccines. Bayer separately sued Johnson & Johnson in New Jersey federal court the same day over a DNA-based process. The company, which was not involved in developing COVID vaccines, is seeking an unspecified amount of monetary damages but is not trying to block production. Pfizer and BioNTech earned over $3.3 billion from their vaccine Comirnaty in 2024, while Moderna earned $3.2 billion from Spikevax, a fraction of peak pandemic sales. Johnson & Johnson stopped selling its COVID vaccine in the U.S. in 2023.
The backwards legal grab
Here’s the thing that makes this lawsuit so wild: the core tech allegedly dates back to the 1980s. Monsanto, the agrochemical giant now owned by Bayer, was fiddling with mRNA stability to make hardier crops. Fast forward four decades, and that foundational work is, according to Bayer, the secret sauce that made the revolutionary COVID mRNA vaccines possible. It’s a classic, if delayed, patent play. Bayer sees dollar signs in a technology it shelved for one application (agriculture) that became the backbone of another (human medicine) worth tens of billions. They’re not trying to stop the shots—that would be a PR nightmare. They just want a piece of the revenue pie while it’s still warm. Smart business? Maybe. But it feels like showing up late to the party and demanding a cut of the bar tab.
A web of pandemic lawsuits
This isn’t happening in a vacuum. It adds to an already tangled knot of legal fights over who owns what in the vaccine gold rush. Remember, Moderna is also suing Pfizer and BioNTech over patent infringement, a case that started back in 2022. So now we have a scenario where practically every major player is suing each other. It’s less about science and public health now and more about corporate lawyers and patent portfolios. The timing is also interesting. They’re filing now, as vaccine sales have plummeted from their astronomical peaks. It’s not about the windfall anymore; it’s about claiming a share of the still-substantial recurring revenue. For Pfizer and Moderna, that $3+ billion a year is now a target.
Why now and what’s next?
So why file these suits in 2025? Patent litigation is a slow, expensive chess game. The vaccines have been on the market for years. One theory is that Bayer needed time to build its case, combing through the science to map its old patents onto the new products. Another, simpler reason: the companies have deep pockets and publicly reported revenues. The lawsuits are a direct monetization of Bayer’s intellectual property vault. What happens next? Years of legal wrangling, likely ending in a settlement. These almost never go to a full trial. The defendants will probably argue the patents are outdated, obvious, or not infringed. But the cost of fighting might just make cutting a check the easier path. For a company like Bayer, which has faced its own massive litigation headaches (see: Roundup), this could be a way to offset some losses. It’s a bold move. Let’s see if it pays off.
