On 2011-09-19, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
Our economy is really based on IP, in some areas. Think of the
pharmaceutical industry in Britain.
Personally I'm a political pirate, and an economically minded classical
liberal/libertarian minarchist, at the same time. I'd be labelled a
federalist in the US circuit, and in the current EU one. Those ideas
mesh well, because from the economic viewpoint, physical property and
the intellectual kind really don't have too much to do with each other.
In fact they fight against each other rather badly: either you can use
your physical DVD as you like, as part of your property/ownership, or
otherwise somebody else holds some sort of ownership right to it, which
precludes you from e.g. copying it willy-nilly. That other right pretty
much has to be an immaterial right, by definition. The same holds for
patents as well, wrt simultaneous invention (which has always been rife,
even with Edison, Bell, and fer gossake even Tesla, who's the poster
child for independent electric invetion, amongst the
"counter-theoretical" folks at least...
We all already know that physical ownership is necessary for progress
and growth. At the same time we do *not* know that "intellectual
property" is needed for that. I mean, come on, it originally started as
the King's or the Guilds' privilege, so as to suppress
printing/duplication of subversive materials. The generally,
historically, first statute to recognize copyright was the Statute of
Anne, which basically just codified medieval guild rights into the
rights of the stationery companies of her time. Thankfully it brought
that stuff under public scrutiny and control for the first time. But
it's not as though we should make that first effort into anything more
than it was; the first effort towards something better.
...
The modern day pharmaceutical industry is perhaps the one exception to
the rule that patents are bad to humanity. Why is that? Well, because
it's remained the most sacred, shielded, unquestioned, and especially
for the longest time. In part because of the huge and quite possibly
unfounded shielding it has. Sometimes that actually works. E.g. it seems
to work with certain very expensive chemotherapeutic agents, right now.
I don't think they would have gone beyond vancomycin in antibiotics, if
it wasn't for intellectual property protection. Because that stuff
already costs *tons*.
But then I actually have a small anecdote to give wrt this, right now,
in the opposite direction. Because of my own current condition. I mean,
about three months ago I suffered a rather nasty prolapsus disci
intervertebralis, which has left me unable to to work or even much move
around. One of my bigger discs in my backbone decided to rupture in a
nasty way, and suddenly I experience a rather debilitating pain in my
right leg.
The real story is that my doctor (a female one if you might wonder about
that), prescribes me etorixocib. Because it's the newest and neatest
COX-2 (cyclooxygenase-2) inhibitor around here. Yes, it does work, to a
point, and no, it doesn't mull your stomach up. She also (atypically)
knows that paracetamol/acetaminophen works via a different route, and
prescribes it together in large amounts with etoricoxib.
What she does *not* know is that the oldest, simplest and cheapest NSAID
medication works even better. I mean, today, now that I ran out of my
prescribed NSAID, I again took a gram's worth of aspirin (acetosalicylic
acid). As before, it worked twice as well as the 30x more expensive
newer -coxib.
I've seen this process many times over already, and since I follow the
clinical and pharmacological literatures as well as I can, this is no
surprise; really, this just happens even with the best of doctors, when
the pharmaceutical industry has even a little bit of influence upon
them. Really, I'm quite certain that my doctor is totally okay and
thinks she is uninfluenced by anything; yet she prescribes me a *very*
expensive and newest COX-2 inhibitor, instead of say the stuff they give
my mom now: naproxen plus a proton pump inhibitor. Which is much
cheaper, but prolly as- or more effective than what I'm eating now.
That's how patents and the like distort real life, in the medical
circuit. Even for us in the Western countries.
Everybody could copy any medicament, as long as the composition is
known.
Which is then good?
This ind of industry simply would brea down without IP, because it is
quite easy to copy a chemical composition if you now it.
Do remember that the original idea behind patents was that they
eventually *should* be copied. The only question is about how soon. And
that calculation could very well have changed in the mean time, after
the first patent paws were passed. I mean, even *you* can't *seriously*
think technological progress goes along at the same rate today, as it
did then. Can you?
Who would any development of new drugs (and perform the costly tests)
if there would be no ind of protection at all?
Maybe nobody. But answer me this: 1) why is this testing so expensive,
2) why is it mandated even against the treatmentees wants, 3) why does
the new drug has to be a cure, instead of a marginal improvement upon a
previous drug, 4) why precisely is it the drug manufacturer's problem if
they offer an imperfect drug to wanting recipients, with full
disclosure, and it then backfires, and e.g. 5) how is it that you can be
convicted even for a successful, illegal drug trial, which helped
muliple individuals?
Nobody, because after some good wok you would have to file fo
bankruptcy, because you are not a bank and nobody would bail you
out... :-D
That much is true. And suddenly I seem to be talking about medicinals.
Not cars or planes or machines.
Therefore, I think there have been and there are very good reasons to
protect people or companies doing innovations. (As everybody knows,
patents are published. Therefore there is less incentive to hide
innovations from others, which is a good thing. )
I'm seeing no real reason for claiming market failure, or then market
invervention, there. I'm you know, as I've already tried to explain, I'm
pretty good at seeing all of those reason.
Thus, please continue, and keep the [ot] ("off topic") tag in the
subject line. Naturally we both like the others on-list to be able to
filter us out, as they so like.
Examples of patent abuse or patent trolls [...]
I've seen many enough even in related fields so that that's given. A
nasty one.
In spite of all fashionable theories in certain circles (often
insider groups with a very homogeneous opinion on topics like
"copyright" and "patents"), I don't think it would be especially good
for the economy to abolish the concept of "soft" ownership.
Maybe not, but maybe it should be made even softer on economic rights.
Like, all immaterial rights (and especially copyright) last for
something between 2-4 years, at max, and perhaps with renewal obligation
in between?
Otherwise, accept that every Chinese company can install a "free"
copy of Windows on any PC.
I would accept. I'd then install GNU/Linux (or perhaps even GNU/Hurd)
instead. The choice would prolly be between Ubuntu and base Debian,
then.
I maybe should co-found some company which does some 1:1 clones of
Apple computers (high quality, of course!) or iPads (you can get the
parts, no secrets here... :-D ), and accept that people can download
the latest Hollywood movie for nothing.
It does sound like a business. Given Apple's outrageous profit margins
and litigiousness, I'd be happy if you did just that. No matter the fact
that Apple *does* really put out high quality computing appliances in
their 3-4 forms. And no matter that I am employed by a rival firm, which
right now seems to be losing to Apple.
However, if I would be too successful with this little reform of a
big part of the world economy (at least China should support my
position! ;-), I probably would become a CIA and/or MI6 target, and I
am not sure about if I want this.
This is already idiotic, so I won't respond to it further. I don't think
you would either. ;)
--
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - de...@iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front
+358-50-5756111, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
