7- A pharmaceutical company has developed a life-saving drug to treat a rare disease affecting a small population. The drug is the result of years of research and significant investment by the company. However, the company decides to patent the drug and sell it at a high price, making it inaccessible to many patients who cannot afford the treatment. As a result, a significant portion of the population suffering from the disease remains untreated due to the high cost of the drug. Questions: 1. From a utilitarian perspective, what is the ethical evaluation of the pharmaceutical company's decision to patent and price the drug at a level that makes it inaccessible to many patients? 2. How might a rights-based ethical framework approach this scenario, considering the right to health and access to life-saving medication? 3. What ethical duties, if any, does the pharmaceutical company have towards the patients in need of the life-saving drug? 4. Consider the consequences of the pharmaceutical company's decision on different stakeholders, including patients, shareholders, and society as a whole. How do these consequences align with different ethical theories? 5. Are there any potential criticisms or weaknesses of the utilitarian analysis of this scenario? If so, what are they and how might they be addressed?