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."

17 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. You gotta wonder about wipout.net... by shoppa · · Score: 3, Informative
    First thing I see after loading http://www.wipout.net is
    This site looks best at 800x600. Netscape users please click here

    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!

  2. Today, the WTO pulled the trigger on another 2.500 by Brian_Ellenberger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Today, the WTO pulled the trigger on another 2.500 poor AIDS victims."

    No, 2,500 AIDS victims pulled the trigger on themselves by making stupid decisions about sex.

    Then the drug companies come along to help and they are attacked by bad Marxist panderings like this.

    Guess what, AIDS is an extremely tough disease and extremely expensive to fight. Extremely expensive. And the government's contributions don't even come close to the cost of developing AIDS drugs. And for every drug and research project that succeeds, many many more fail.

    If the drug companies were really in some big capitalist consipracy to screw over the world they wouldn't have picked AIDS (a preventable disease) to do it with. They would be screwing you over with the polio and smallpox. Instead, the evil drug companies pretty much eliminated those diseases from the planet.

    Brian Ellenberger

  3. Re:Hmm by crayz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These people aren't buying them in the first place. Do you seriously think anyone would lose any money by saving these poor people's lives?

    This is one of the most despicable examples of capitalistic selfishness I have ever seen, because unlike most debates, where it is capitalists arguing against life and for profits, here they are arguing against life and just for some abstract economic morality. It shows the sheer insanity of Ayn Rand reading pyschopaths who care *nothing* for any fellow humans beings. It is absolutely sickening.

  4. Drugs Patents Do Make Sense by geoffsmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not a huge fan of patents, but drug patents are one of the few types of patents that make sense. Why do we need patents? To subsidize the cost of innovation. And the cost of innovation is often steep, it has always been much easier to ripoff someone's idea than develop it yourself. Often times, the inventor doesn't profit at all from his invention. (see Xerox->Apple->Windows)

    For pharamceutical companies, the cost to develop drugs is high, not just because of all the trial and error involved (although rational drug design does help), but because of all the FDA-mandated trials involved. The patent system, as far as I know, is the only system that has been developed to offset the costs of getting a drug FDA-approved.

    Its not like a software patent, where the costs of innovation are mostly pizza and Jolt. I would like to see a better system for compensating drugs companies for the money they put into getting a drug approved, but I have not seen one. Maybe instead granting drugs patents for a set number of years, we could grant them based on the time it takes to recoup the trial costs? At least then we could minimize the damage done by granting a monopoly on a life-saving substance.

    Websurfing: The Next Generation - StumbleUpon

    1. Re:Drugs Patents Do Make Sense by inerte · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm not a huge fan of patents, but software patents are one of the few types of patents that make sense. Why do we need patents? To subsidize the cost of innovation. And the cost of innovation is often steep, it has always been much easier to ripoff someone's idea than develop it yourself. Often times, the inventor doesn't profit at all from his invention. (see Marijuana->Cocaine->Ecstasy)

      For software companies, the cost to code is high, not just because of all the trial and error involved (although rational programming does help), but because of all the Standars Committees Specs involved. The patent system, as far as I know, is the only system that has been developed to offset the costs of getting a software User-approved.

      Its not like a drug patent, where the costs of innovation are mostly stealling other researchers. I would like to see a better system for compensating software companies for the money they put into getting a software approved, but I have not seen one. Maybe instead granting software patents for a set number of years, we could grant them based on the time it takes to recoup the trial costs? At least then we could minimize the damage done by granting a monopoly on a life-saving feature.

    2. Re:Drugs Patents Do Make Sense by Bobzibub · · Score: 3, Informative

      But Patents do not necessarily mean innovation. For instance:
      http://www.aegis.com/news/ads/2001/AD01 2206.html
      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

  5. Re:Today, the WTO pulled the trigger on another 2. by x-empt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, 2,500 AIDS victims pulled the trigger on themselves by making stupid decisions about sex.

    Not true! Many AIDS victims are born with HIV because of their parent's decisions. Unprotected sex is a big cause of the spreading, but when you spread your spermies into a woman. She might get HIV, but since you are unprotected she will probably also end up with a baby.

    Also, my two cents: Anyone saying that AIDS is a disease that punishes gays is definately wrong. I think its just another reason not to be gay in San Francisco :)

    --
    Ever need an online dictionary?
  6. yes but by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While the cost of development is high the cost of production is really low. Now when you have a bunch of people that wouldnt be able to pay for the drugs anyway why not just give them the drug at lower or no cost. Such cost differentiation is not unheard of. for example some drugs for pets are cheap, while the identical drugs for humans are expensive. Thats because people wouldnt pay the high costs of a drug for a pet.

  7. Balderdash by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Today, the WTO pulled the trigger on another 2.500 poor AIDS victims."

    There is a great deal of question as to whether the infrastructure exists to deliver and administer the anti-AIDS drugs even if they we made available at zero cost.

    We are talking about countries where the per capita health care spending is less than $10/year.

    These are also the same places where other diseases that could be cured at far less cost than AIDS go uncontrolled. Malaria kills far more people than AIDS, and is far less expensive to fight. How can you make a moral case about AIDS drugs when in fact spending the money on fighting other diseases would offer greater relief from suffering with the same resources?

    1. Re:Balderdash by mochan_s · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    2. Re:Balderdash by Ian+Bicking · · Score: 4, Informative
      Indeed -- AIDS is overblown in Africa, simply a disease of definition. This paper gives the WHO's definition:
      The WHO's clinical-case definition for AIDS in Africa (adopted in 1985) is not based on an HIV test or T-cell counts but on the combined symptoms of chronic diarrhea, prolonged fever, 10 percent body weight loss in two months and a persistent cough, none of which are new or uncommon on the African continent.
      Which is to say, AIDS in Africa is a total fraud. Mbeki was right when he criticized the "epidemic". To say that Africa is undergoing a very serious decay of health systems is entirely true -- the problem isn't a lack of AIDS drugs, but a lack of basic public health facilities -- clean water, mosquito and malaria control, hospital facilities, trained medical professionals, etc.

      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.

  8. Do we need counter-essays? by dunkstr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Have you read the English winner of the WIPO contests?

    For me, it was a succinct summary of many of the problems with intellectual property. It would have been more fitting in the counter-essay competition. Basically, the author lists from a personal perspective how harmful all the laws can be and then says "But it's the law so watcha gonna do?" (I'm paraphrasing)

    How is that an endorsement of IP?

    Am I missing something?

  9. How many? by jcsehak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    C'mon, I don't know the statistics, but I'm sure the vast majority of AIDS victims are not infants or blood transfusees (how d'ya like that word, spelling/grammar nazis?), they're people who've had promiscuous sex or used unclean drug paraphenelia. I have nothing but sympathy for anyone who contracts it, even it it was from a night with the goatse.cx man. Nobody deserves to die before their time. But the fact is, 99% of the time, AIDS is a preventable disease. I thank the original poster for his objectivity, especially in regards to the "evil drug corporations."

    Anyone saying that AIDS is a disease that punishes gays is definately wrong.

    Of course. Diseases don't punish people. They merely try to survive and reproduce, just like any other organism. But having sex with someone who's sexual history (and current status) you're not absolutely sure of is like sneaking up on a mother bear and her cubs-- no matter how uneducated you were about it, somewhere it should register that it could get you killed, and if you wind up dead, that definitely sucks, but don't play innocent with me, and don't critisize the government for not filling the pool when you jump in with your eyes closed.

    Today, the WTO pulled the trigger on another 2.500 poor AIDS victims.

    Besides, what's another two and a half people, in the grand scheme of things?

    --

    c-hack.com |
  10. Re: Wipout Essay Results by prockcore · · Score: 5, Funny

    " Today is World Intellectual Property day... What! Why didn't anyone tell me! I could have been planning a party!"

    We wanted to tell you, but you refused to sign the NDA.

  11. The Sweet Irony by benzapp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is of course quite amusing that the only way to enslave drug companies and their employees to work for free is by in fact using guns or other forms of deadly persuasion.

    The Marxist here can decry the drug companies TODAY for not giving away the fruits of their labor for free. He can equate inaction with murder.

    But what happens when drug companies refuse to develop drugs because these same marxists constantly steal them?

    They have no choice but to persuade their citizenry not with money, but violence.

    So, you won't develop that drug for $4.75 an hour? fine, do it or you go to the slave labor camps!

    Suggesting Capitalists are murderers! nothing could be more amusing. Of course, it is not amusing to the 100 million who have died in the last century at the hands of Marxists and their murderous toys.

    But who gives a fuck about them?

    --
    I don't read or respond to AC posts
  12. Re:Hmm by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok hows this: Have you splurged on yourself lately. Maybe bought a new pair of shoes when the old pair would have got you around for a while longer. Or maybe eaten out when you could have eaten at home. You could have sent that money overseas to help buy that medicine. Did you put your own selfish greed and avarice over people - causing deaths and pain?

    It is a much more complex issue then you make it out to be and easy to center the problem on evil and heartless corporations.

  13. Re:Today, the WTO pulled the trigger on another 2. by God!+Awful · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Slashdot Reader: This is so unfair. Starving children in Burundi are dying of AIDS because they can't afford the medicine. People in Westernized countries should pay for the cost of research because they can afford it.

    Some time later....

    Slashdot Reader: Guess what. I just bought this DVD for $2 from a website in Burundi, but the damn thing won't work in my player because of the regional encoding. Why should I have to pay $30 for a DVD when you can buy the exact same thing in Burundi for $2?

    -a