On Sat, 20 Oct 2001 04:24:25 -0700 (PDT) "martin chao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Copyright and IP rights are legalized theft from the > >public of a idea or piece of work. > > So obtaining a few million of investment to create a > cure for a cancer, and patenting that cure in order to > ensure re-payment of that investment is theft from the > public? Even though that return on investment will > likely motivate others to invest in other cancer > projects? > > Perhaps you need to be a victim of cancer before you > respect biotech. > > Oh wait, let me guess, your philosophy only applies to > software, music, porn, and no other form of IP. Right? > If two seperate companies (nice corp. and evil corp.) bave been research a cure for cancer seperatly for say 10 years. Nice corp wants to make their discovery free for anyone to produce and use. Evil corp wants to restict production to only supply the richest 10% of sufferers. Say the evil corporation makes a breakthrough and beats good corp. by a few days (weeks whatever). The evil corporation will get exclusive use of the technology for what 25 years or something. Hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of people would die just to protect you and your buddies idea that preservation of wealth makes you a better person. Why cant the government restrict patents to situations where it can be shown to be in publics interest ? Do you realise that IP came about to benefit the public, to eliminate the benefit of corprations not disclosing there knowledge. Its not neccessarily the concept of IP that is flawed, tis the timeframe. If someone hasnt made there money back from a high tech industry with 12 months then they probably never will. So how does it benefit society to allow knowledge to be mismanaged. Glenn _______________________________________________ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
