Slashdot Mirror
We Pledge Allegiance to the Penguin
tres3 writes "Wired magazine has an excellent four page article discussing Brazil's new approach to Intellectual Property rights. It discusses everything from battling with the international pharmaceutical industries, to song sampling, to the national adoption of Linux. Richard Stallman
stated that India's political commitment to free software is second only to Brazil's after attending a weeklong free software teach-in for members of the Brazilian national congress, where 161 out of 594 members of congress, from a broad range of parties, had signed up with the free software caucus - making it one of the largest caucuses in the Brazilian government."
Yes, because to an average politician's mind, free Brazilian language software is a great way to foster a homegrown software industry based on earning money...
;)
The point is that Free Software will make Brazil (hopefully) more productive on computers, quicker and cheaper. The way it should be
Gamers Europe - Gaming News. Reviews.
I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
is this.
Democratizing knowledge so that anyone/everyone can benefit.
I expect this trend wil continue to emerge.
"Poorer" countries will be the main adopter of Open Source. It will be cheaper; and it will encourage creativity and growth of IT.
Timang tinggi tinggi
parang sudah asah
alang alang mandi
biar sampai basah
This should give Brazil's economy a big boost, too. Let's just hope that the usual suspects don't manage to undo all the progress in a few years. This should be popular with the populists, so maybe they won't screw it up. That still leaves the fascists and the socialists and the international corps to work to screw it up, unfortunately.
I predict that the most effective opposition will come from the U.S. and the E.U. governments. I hope Brazil stands up to them; I'd really like to be able to move South for economic opportunity!
See what I've been reading.
This is about freedom of information, freedom of ideas. Linux is a part of that in that embodies freedom in software, but to only look at Linux is to miss the broader context.
There is no marginal cost to the sharing of digital or intellectual content, beyond the cost of transmission and storage. This fight is about taking ideas out of the hands of a few powerful entities with a vested interest in maintaining their power, and shifting it to everyone.
The world will benefit. The fucked nature of the existing system is no better demonstrated than in the US - where you'd think that having all the power would make life better. But medicine is more expensive there than in almost any other Western country.
-- james
PS please don't start feeding me bullshit about how you have to be paying more for drugs to support the companies. I cannot believe people actually tow this line. It's human health, for chrissakes
I'm all for free software and cheap drugs, but we still need to respect the copyrights and patients of the developers.
Like the hell we do. It's one thing to acknowledge their contribution to the world - it's another to assume that there should be some kind of a god given right for personal monopolies - even when millions of people in Africa are dying of AIDS. Like cows to the slaughter, people just assume that because a bunch of people declare something a glorious free market property right - that it must be so. But really, do you own slaves?
And they're going to do what, exactly? Execute Linus and RMS? Firebomb the FSF? You are making totally ridiculous assertions.
Yes, if there were no companies at all, then we'd have everything we always wanted, right away... Either that, or there wouldn't be anyone doing anything. I vote for the later. You actually think companies actually don't want to run fiber to your home?
And I'm the president.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
And India is known for having tons of programmers. I'm sure programmers never produce any intellectual property at all.
Many of these comments are weak. It's not just about getting free stuff, and it has nothing to do with the fact that Brazil exports very little IP. It's about big, important, multinational patent holders playing fair. Notice that Roche sat on their patent throne until Brazil threatened to make their own drugs. Notice that they were able to sell the stuff at *less than half the original price* when Brazil actually held good on the threat. Is this unlike Microsoft's behaviour? I think not. They crank up the prices of their OS and Office constantly, even though they are raking in the dough - that is until emerging markets are unwilling to put up with it. All of a sudden code starts to be released, discount editions are offered, and cooperation with foreign governments begins. And guess what? They are still raking in the dough. Who would have thunk? Just because Americans are willing to put up monopolies, inflated prices, and unfair patents doesn't make it right. Maybe it's time to learn something from the third world.
Some of us contribute to the cause, be it with code, with documentation, with support... Do you know who brought the wonders of Debian's APT to the RPM world? Conectiva, the leading Brazilian Linux distributor. WindowMaker? A brazilian wrote it. How about the kernel itself? The 2.4 branch is currently maintained by a brazilian, too. OpenOffice.org has received many contributions from the Brazilian team, as well as GNOME, Debian, and so far so on. Therefore, while not everyone has the skills to contribute to free software, those who have them more often than not do contribute to free software.
And yes, some of us brazilians also actually pay for our distros; the biggest problem with that is that it is more difficult to pay for a foreign (read American) distribution, due to rate changes and bureaucracy. However, when there is an easy way to pay, we do; Conectiva is there to prove it.
Stupidity is an equal opportunity striker.
Fellow slashdotter Bill Dog
India has one of the largest movie Industries in the world. They also have a large number of programmers, authors, musicians etc.
Just because it's not in english doesn't mean it doesn't really exist, or is worthless, or doesn't make a lot of money for their makers. A billion people in your domestic market can make you quite rich.
You think anyone outside of America, has even heard of a quarter of the people you think are famous?
Terry Pratchett, makes a lot of money from his books, how many do you think he sells in India?
If a first you don't succeed, your a programmer...
I find myself caught between two desires. I love the OSC, what it stands for, and the desire to see Microsofts monopoly crumble. On the other hand, I love that I live in a country where I don't get paid $240 a month for the work I do, and I realize that Microsoft and the other companies that hold patents on drugs, and other exportable goods, bring in the money to keep the US employees... well... employed. Inherently I loath the restrictions of big companies on what I want to do with goods I've purchased... for example -- on my ability to create an MP3 from a CD that I purchased. Or rip a DVD to have on my computer in digital format instead of hard copy... if for no other reason, than because I choose to. When it comes to health care, and what hurts people, I believe in, and support, Brazils move to 'bite their thumbs' at big companies in defense of the Brazilian population. I just worry that things have gotten so far out of wack within the US in terms of patent, that people can be sued for coming up with the same idea in two different locations, and in two different ways, independently, and the person who gets to the patent office first wins... what mess. Sometimes I guess you just have to take a couple steps back from the nonsense, and use common sense instead.
There is no marginal cost to the sharing of digital or intellectual content, beyond the cost of transmission and storage.
I will say this as simply as possible:
The cost of reproducing a digital asset is completely unrelated to the cost of creating the asset.
People who say otherwise have obviously never created anything worth selling. If I spend 100 hours to invent a new widget, I will probably make blueprints or some other form of diagram. I can make copies of those documents in a local copy shop for ~2 cents apiece. Does that mean my time spent creating the new widget is worth what I spend for the copies? That is absolutely ridiculous: for some reason people expect commercial entities to do their R&D for free and sell the result for the cost of media. I can't imagine how that begins to make sense to anyone.
This fight is about taking ideas out of the hands of a few powerful entities with a vested interest in maintaining their power, and shifting it to everyone.
Those "powerful entities" are the ones that created the intellectual property. Their "vested interest" is completely justified: designing and developing products is expensive, and compaines recoup that expense by - get this - selling the product.
Using lofty terms like "this fight" is silly, and the result of people expecting to get everything for free. Wake up, Sparky - some things actually cost money, and trying to spin your desire for zero-cost products as some sort of noble effort makes you look like ap spoiled child.
PS I am speaking here about commercial entities and products, not F/OSS (which should be obvious).
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
"Take India, for example. While they may have pop singers and the like who are enormously popular domestically, the global market for such music doesn't even begin to approach that of America's."
... And thats just one artist. Obviously Rahman is more motivated than Britney and Madonna to protect his IP. And taken solely in terms of music sales, Rahman's "IP" is as valuable as Madonna's and Britney's put together. The reason that India lags behind in generating Tech IP is that it is nowhere near the US in terms of industrialization. But please, lets not talk about Movie or Music IP.
This reeks of blissful ignorance. Lets get some facts straight. Repeat after me: India's population is slightly higher than North America and Europe put together.
Consequence ? Even if they sell one CD outside india, the "global" sales can far outstrip any artist in US. You think Britney is popular ? How about Madonna ? Ever heard of Rahman ? Quoted from the article: "In terms of sales, Rahman is already bigger than the biggest. His music has already sold over 200 million cassettes. That's more than Madonna and Britney Spears put together."
How do the millions of people dying of AIDS have any claim whatsover to the drugs? The drugs that wouldn't have been there if your evil drug companies hadn't spent the $$ to make them? It's not like drugs fall from the sky and they're being hoarded, like diamonds or something. Without the drug companies you know what you have? NOT A FUCKING THING. With them, you get something, an infinite percent improvement. If you get some free, or some cheap, be grateful.
Excuse me, but your glorious pharmacutical companies are making it impossible for researchers to collaberate on AIDS remedys because they want grab key patents and lock out competitors. In addition, they actively interfere with research on cheaper and simple remidies that could be even more beneficial - but can not be patented. This is not a glorious free market forces at all - it is bullshit, and people are FUCKING dying because of it. I don't owe the pharmacuticals a Goddam thing - But people have rights and deserve freedoms inspite of them not because it suits their profits.
In order to use M$, Brazil has to pay $$ (as in "USD"). And because Brazil does not (you inconsiderate clods...) have a convertable currency, it has to convert something tangible -- soybeans will do -- into $$. Since the marginal cost of reproducing open-source software is more or less zero, whereas the marginal cost of producing soybeans (or whatever) is decidedly greater than zero, it's an easy decision.
The US, in contrast, simply prints more dollars (figuratively -- actually we sell treasury bills) and, as long as other countries (read: China, Japan) accept those freshly printed dollars, we get stuff without necessarily having to generate a comparable amount of items (a.k.a. "trade deficit").
Nice deal, as long as it works. And it will work forever, won't it? Won't it???
Start practicing your Portuguese...
"All successful systems accumulate parasites" -- Hal Hixon
On the flip side, if through hard work and determination, I create something useful to others and attempt to make money from it in order to feed my family should you, who did nothing to bring about its creation, be allowed to simply take it from me without compensating me for my time and effort to do with as you please?
Yes I should, because I have a family to feed to, and your invention likely builds on zillions of things, experiences, and knowledge, that society gave you freely - now to turn arround and say they owe you a monopoly is bullshit. Not to mention that 90% of patents especially cover incremental improvements that were going to be invented anyhow with or without a monopoly. So basically, you're not benefiting society - you're just getting in the way of future innovation, why should you be rewarded for that?
It's so easy to forget the original economic rationale for patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets. The rationale has *little or nothing* to do with fair/deserved (or outrageous/undeserved, whatever the case may be!) compensation for the intellectual rights holders. It has *everything* to do with solving a fundamental economic problem with the provision of (nearly) public goods; goods with high initial/fixed costs and near-zero marginal costs.
Intellectual rights protections are about providing incentives for innovation and production. Perhaps it's fashionable to talk about "tropicalizing" (yes, I read TFA), but we should always ask what the incentive structure for innovation/production will look like when rights protections are changed. Perhaps there's a viable model of software development (open-source) outside traditional copyright law, but is there a viable model for producing books, music, movies, technological innovation, and all the other activities protected by IP laws?
Imposing Libertarian views on everyone online since 1992.
No, my logic is like saying: their property is theirs, not anyone else's.
My geo-metro is my property - a copy of it is not. In fact, please make a copy - I won't be violated. In fact, there are 10 million coppies, I am not violated. It is bullshit morality. As far as I'm concerned - 'the pharmacuticals' can have all the property they want, and I wouldn't care. But that's not what they're asking for - they are asking for controll over who can make replicas. That is NOT a property (repeat after me, the right to replicate is not a property ... repeat after me, the right to replicate is not a property) , and it is not even good for society, and I can prove it because it has all sorts of consequences that you seem to like blowing off - but other countries like brazil can not, because people are dying over it. And your assertion that cures would never be found anyhow, is bullshit.
Why is it that the countries listed as the most "permissive" in terms of intellectual property laws are the ones that seem to create the least amount of intellectual property worth protecting?
Before we begin, perhaps you can let us all know why you believe that some people's material is worth protecting more than others. Shouldn't all of it be protected exactly the same?
Take India, for example.
Yes, lets.
While they may have pop singers and the like who are enormously popular domestically, the global market for such music doesn't even begin to approach that of America's
First of all, that's complete bullshit. Please provide a link to back up your claims. And even if you were correct (which you are not) are you saying that popularity is relevant as to whether something should receive copyright? As in "if something is more unpopular, then it shouldn't receive copyright protection" - if so, your hypocrisy is palpable.
It's a lot easier to take that kind of stand on IP (I.E. that it's not worth protecting) when you have nothing of your own to protect and everything to take.
So what have *you* come up with? What songs/stories/movies have you written/perofrmed?
Yeah, I thought so.