Slashdot Mirror
Wipout Essay Results
chrestomanci writes "The Register is reporting on the
results of a counter-essay contest run by wipout.net (an international organisation that seeks to limit the reach of the WIPO and intellectual property rights in general) against the WIPO's own essay contest, both with the title "What does intellectual property mean to you in your daily life?". A telling slogan reads: Today, the WTO pulled the trigger on another 2.500 poor AIDS victims."
Right Of Intellectual Property AND Public Spaces Of Information
Juan Mateos García
In this trial I am going to indicate some of the supposed theoreticians in which itself fundamentan the intellectual rights of property (DPI). Subsequently I will analyze briefly as they are able these to affect to the future possibilities of communities that they create information without I encourage of gain, as the open movement of code, concentrating me in certain dynamic aspects of the DPI, mainly their nature vírica. During the following discussion I will employ the extensive form information term, including data, discoveries and scientific theories, technological appliances and artistic creations. Intellectual property: private and public interests The intellectual property rights framework is based on the premise that one of the incentivos basic that motivates the creators of information is the monetario. The DPI they guarantee these persons a legal control upon the distribution of you said "goods", and permits them to obtain a reward, so much economic as social, by its productive activity. The need of this type of protection of the rights of author or creative is derives from what we would be able to call as "intangibilidad" of the information, associate to the relative facility with the one that can be carry out its reproduction and distribution. Simplifying, we would be able to say that to copy a book or an idea simply are necessary paper and ink. To do the same thing with a car, one must employ, on the other hand, matters cousins and a difficult, complex, and long process of production (and including thus, the producers of cars protect the "information" content in specific models by means of DPI). Thus, according to the traditional economic theory, in absence of DPI, not they would exist incentivos for the creation of information, given that al to be able to be this copied and redistribuida without restrictions neither control, would be very difficult for its potential producers to obtain a reward by its intial effort. In this way, has laid out to consider that the technological development and the apparition again methods for the reproduction and transmisión of information, just as Internet, they create a threat for the intellectual property and they do necessary the fortalecimiento of the states of DPI in force. Another essential property of the information is that produces externalidades, this is, alien positive effects to its creator. For example, the access to data upon a scientific discovery can benefit to thousands of investigators in that same field, although not they be directly related to the responsible for said discovery. The new fragments of information become pieces of a puzzle that they can turn out to be useful for the technological and scientific advance in many distinct fronts. They exist, therefore, large benefits potential associates to a flow of information with the smaller possible restrictions. Here it is where the conflict among the private interests of the creator of information arises, supposedly motivated by the benefits monetarios that can obtain thanks to their discovery, and the public interests of more more extensive communities than they can need that new information for the execution of other scientific tasks and innovadoras. The DPI they should seek an equilibrium among these two categories of interests, that in many cases they can enter conflict, and due to it everything that refers to the modification or intensificación of the rights of property upon cultural and intellectual goods carefully should be meditated and submitted to debate. It should be tried that the individuals arrange of incentivos to undertake activities innovadoras and creative without, simultaneously, necks of bottle they are believed and restrictions that impede the aprovechamiento of the new discoveries by more more extensive communities. It is this type of debate the one that absent encounter in the growing tendency to consider the information as merchandise, being dispensing with its characteristics of well public. The privatización of the public spaces of information Added al problem of the trade-off among rights of the author and right of the society, the question of those individuals appears that do not behave according to the supposed subyacentes to the DPI, and that they can see their activities complicated or impeded by these. We would be able to say that the model that fundamenta the DPI favors the creation of information on the part of certain type of communities, with a series of motivaciones, marginando to those that itselfThey behave according to supposed distinct. We think for example in those that they create information and they distribute it for Internet without requiring nothing to change: the fortalecimiento of the DPI, and the growing tendency to consider the information as a merchandise property of someone can put in danger the existence of the existing reservations of "public information" created by these, al to promote its appropriation on the part of individuals with economic objectives, doing to disappear finally the conducts that notThey are found based on motivaciones monetarias. We would be able to say that of the same way that those motivated by money only they will create information if their rights upon her can be assured, those with the aspiration of destining the information that produce to public spaces will see its efforts desincentivados if turns out to be simple for other to be appropriated of its contributions (retiring them of said "espacios"). An example preocupante of this type of behaviors oportunistas would be the appropriation of protocolos of public communication on the part of private businesses. They exist large incentivos for this type of conducts, due to that the control upon these "bridges" (that all the ones that employ certain middles of communication should cross) can guarantee large benefits to its owners. Al to add extensions protected by DPI to this type of standards, these groups can obtain a strategic control upon them. Would be observing a privatización of the public spaces of information favored by the tendency to the extension and intensificación of the DPI. Copyright and Copyleft With the objective of avoiding this type of processes of "contamination of standards", distinct groups have resorted to legal instruments heterodoxos and innovadores, as the General one Public License that protects al operating system Linux of the appropriation on the part of organizations with commercial interests. Al contrary that the DPI traditional, that we would be able to call generic as "copyright", these DPI alternative ( "copyleft") they are base on the contagion of the characteristic of "publicity" to private fragments of information. For example, any piece of software that be added to a system covered by the GPL is seen submitted to the conditions you imposed by the GPL, that they are of opening, transparency and publicity. This special characteristic has given rise to protests about the character "vírico" of GPL, that according to some they affirm, can damage seriously al system of DPI and to the producing industries of information. We find ourselves, in this case, before a discussion among groups with distinct interests, in certain parallel form to the ones that has described previously. While some they consider to the information mainly as a merchandise produced and intercambiada following motivaciones economic, other they seem to be more more next to the definition of information as well public, and they distribute it freely with diverse objectives, as for example that of maximizing the quantities of this produced "commonly" (following the type of reasons to the ones that have alluded to previously when spoke of externalidades). In this conflict among ideologies and aspirations up to a point contrapuestas, they can observe as the distinct groups they seek to influence in the legal framework so that this favor the execution of its activities. On the one hand are the agents that act for spirit of gain and they try to promote definitions of the DPI more more extensive and powerful, that they permit them to control and to expand their active intellectuals. By another they are found those that they try to avoid the appropriation of their public spaces of information and of those tools and protocolos that need to develop their activities. The fact that the first be used to being large businesses with greater resources and experience in practice of the cabildeo has given rise to that be its influence the most most notable one in the process of fijación of political priorities that determines the future evolution of the legal framework. The character vírico of the intellectual rights of property An important question that many seem to forget in this debate is that the instruments of copyright, al the same as the of copyleft, they possess properties víricas: they tend to infect the public information becoming it in private. Any type of information desprotegida, public and with some economic type of value can be appropriate with few difficulties. Al to acceptDefinitions each more more lax time of "originality", the registrations of DPI permit the privatización of enormous assemblies of information to the ones that suffices with adding extensions "proprietary". Imaginémonos the piece of information "TO", public. Adding him another piece of information "B", private, a business can create "C" ( = TO + B + B based on "TO" (public), but of its property. The use of these strategies enables the expansion of the private spaces of information at the expense of any public type of reservation. Facing this expansion of the DPI they arise measured like the GPL, likewise aggressive but in the contrary sense. The one that it be accused of having properties "víricas" results as much as less ironic: have seen that if is not guaranteed that the extensions added to a piece protected by GPL return public property, is accepted implicitly that the piece protected by GPL finish being become private, according to the process described previously. This it can explain us some of the reasons that they underlie to the opposition al GPL on the part of large businesses of software as Microsoft, famous by their use of tactical of "adoption and extension" (embrace and extend) of public pieces of information. In this type of arguments they exist large dose of hypocrisy and arrogance, and seems to be affirmed implicitly that the valid only model for the creation of information is that based on motivaciones monetarias. Conclusion we find Ourselves, finally, with a situation conflictiva: the individuals carry out productive activities to satisfy a series of aspirations and objective. The legal framework constitutes part of the entorno in which they unfold, and can favor or entorpecer its efforts. The political decisions and regulatorias, especially in which refers to the DPI they can affect of deep form to the possibilities of certain communities to follow developing their information creation activities. The biggest influence of the businesses in this context is giving rise to a desequilibrio inside the relative importance assigned to the objectives of the DPI, favoring a privatización of the public spaces of information. Thus, the instruments of copyleft arise like a defense on the part of communities with distinct interests to the monetarios. In my opinion the opposition and attack to these instruments forms part of the global tendency toward the intensificación of the DPI that already has described. In this situation of conflict among groups with aspirations contrapuestas is necessary, therefore, a debate in which be recognized that the incentivos monetarios not they are the ONLY motivaciones for the creation of information, and in which a transparent and open discussion be carry out about how obtaining an equilibrium among the distinct objectives of the DPI. What it seems clear is that if tools for the protection of the public forums of information as the GPL are weakened or eliminated, will be difficult that many persons inside them follow contributing and working for motivaciones alien to the monetaria. I create necessary, therefore, a replanteamiento of the present tendencies in the political and legal framework, and a greater tolerance and sensibility toward the distinct motivaciones of the groups dedicated to the task of creating information.
Under lynx, of course, all you see is an vast landscape of clickable (and un-ALT tagged) GIF's.
They may be all for freedom of expression, but they haven't yet mastered freedom of browsing!
Dude, I'm callin' shenanigans on you. In sub-saharan Africa up to 20% of the population is infected with AIDS. Burundi is a good example, they have a 19% infection rate. It isn't as though they are being unsafe or overly promiscuous; there is no birth or disease control available to them, and furthermore, everybody has it, so avoiding it is rendered difficult.
Yes, there IS a conspiracy of sorts. The conspiracy is that the pharmaceutical companies and their extremely powerful allies won't allow AIDS drugs to be manufactured overseas. Treatment is so expensive because the pharms. charge markups in excess of 1000% on the cost of manufacture. The conspiracy is that money is always weighed above human life in our country.
Qoute:Malaria kills far more people than AIDS
Maybe in the 1980s and before. From the link ; BC titled "Aids Africa's top killer ", AIDS is the largest killer in Africa.
$10/year is misleading. If they were to produce the drug in that country then the cost of the drug would match up to the $10/year heath care spending. In other words, they could produce it real cheap.
But Patents do not necessarily mean innovation. For instance:1 2206.html
http://www.aegis.com/news/ads/2001/AD0
One company has patents on two HIV testing methods. The company is withholding the better one because it is generating more revenue on the worse (slower) one.
cheers,
-b
With the WHO's definition of AIDS it is scary if people were to actual receive the drug coctail based on that diagnosis (I don't know -- maybe they wouldn't). AZT kills people -- it is a very harmful drug, and if they didn't have something that looks like American AIDS before they start taking AZT, they will after.
I'm afraid this is one place where the activists have been a very negative influence. The attacks on Mbeki were intense and they totally ignored his reasons. IMHO, AIDS in non-risk populations hasn't, isn't, and won't be a serious health issue here or in Africa -- but people have formed their identity around the disease, and that makes it very hard for them to let go.
Here's an article by Chomsky on the WTO and pharmaceutical companies from a few years back.