Debate discussion: intellectual property in an AC land

[almostbusto]

Zyw,

I agree with your thoughts on the food speculators in Venezuela. Its a great case study in markets forming organically and inducing efficiency into the existing economic system.

the rest, not so much. ill probably expand on position later.

[zyqwert]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How much damage are the creators allowed to do to innocent people in their quest to get paid?

[/ QUOTE ]

How much did the imitator benefit by adopting the innovation?

[/ QUOTE ]

First, on the question of digital content being redistributed, the distributor got paid nothing -- he did not benefit. I agree you can use the law to stop people from profiting from your IP, but how can you compete with free?

Second, my question was about the IP rights holders damaging innocent people. In their war against economics, rights holders have used the legislative process to extract money from people who never touch their digital content. That's why I ask where you draw the line in IP enforcement, and when you admit the problem can't be solved.

[JuntMonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
IE why cure cancer if as soon as you find the cure 10000000 companies buy your medicine then reproduce it themselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know a salesman who has all the big pharma companies as clients. In making small talk with scientists at one of them he was told while they had previously had done lots of research on HIV, HIV research was now decimiated. Lifestyle drugs for erections, baldness, and cholesterol were all the rage. The reason is simple and obvious: they know they can get paid for these drugs and they've learned they won't get paid for HIV drugs.

The lesson is we should demand free Viagra and let the drug companies go crazy with prices for cures to serious life threatening illnesses.

[/ QUOTE ]

you tell an interesting story. but there are many HIV drugs going through testing as I type. anyway that is a product of the market. there may be some externalities in play(i am sure there are since HIV must have external effects on the economy of Africa). If you are saying you'd like those internalized then i would agree. otherwise, let the market decide what to produce. i see no problem with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Drugs for erections and cholesterol are MUCH more important for US citizens than AIDS drugs, because AIDS is a virtually non-existent risk for the vast majority of the population.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason is simple and obvious: they know they can get paid for these drugs and they've learned they won't get paid for HIV drugs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but that's more due to so many governments forcing them to charge less than cost for drugs.

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How much damage are the creators allowed to do to innocent people in their quest to get paid?

[/ QUOTE ]

How much did the imitator benefit by adopting the innovation?

[/ QUOTE ]

First, on the question of digital content being redistributed, the distributor got paid nothing -- he did not benefit. I agree you can use the law to stop people from profiting from your IP, but how can you compete with free?

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't. In those cases, the rights holder is better off just facing the situation, arriving at a sense of closure within himself and moving on.

[ QUOTE ]
Second, my question was about the IP rights holders damaging innocent people. In their war against economics, rights holders have used the legislative process to extract money from people who never touch their digital content. That's why I ask where you draw the line in IP enforcement, and when you admit the problem can't be solved.

[/ QUOTE ]

My opinion is that you go after those who are profiting. If the market says the IP has no value, then there isn't much point.