Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Says 4.3 Billion People Live With Bad IP Laws

Posted by Soulskill on from the shame-on-all-of-you dept.

bowser100 writes "The US government has released its annual Special 301 report (PDF) in which it purports to identify those countries with inadequate intellectual property laws. Michael Geist digs into the report, noting the list is so large that it is rendered meaningless. According to the report, approximately 4.3 billion people live in countries without effective intellectual property protection. Since the report does not include any African countries outside of North Africa, the US is effectively saying that only a small percentage of the world meets its standard for IP protection."

3 of 229 comments (clear)

  1. Where is the evidence? by drDugan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have yet to see anyone present objective evidence that the existence of copyright, either in its current term/form the US/WIPO/ACTA is pushing, (or at all) helps the economy in the countries in question compared to other systems or models.

    Obviously there are significant businesses that thrive now and could only exist with strong copyright protections. Entertainment, media creation, information aggregators and sellers - all require strong copyright to exist. Without these protections they would be hurt, somewhat, and some would go away.

    There is incredible interest and energy in people to consume, remix, and to create, even with the existing, extremely long copyright term, and the vast majority of media under strict copyright protections. Would we see dramatic new businesses and opportunities arise if copyright were less stringent or not? Would these new markets and activities be better for economies than the loss of existing industries or not?

    What evidence supports the belief that having these companies and these particular industries are what is best for a countries' economy, and for the people whose lives and livelihoods these laws effect? If copyright protections were opt-in for example, but the default were similar to a CC/BY for created content, what new industries would rise up and create value? Would they create more value than would be lost? I don't know of any evidence that can address that question. What if copyright protections were 14 years again, with the ability for owners to pay or re-apply for extensions? That would clear create value in new areas, but would it be better than the current system?

    If anyone has pointers to evidence either way, I'd love to see it.

    1. Re:Where is the evidence? by kubitus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      http://www.worldmapper.org/display.php?selected=99

  2. Re:there is a map which shows the reason by kubitus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    http://www.worldmapper.org/display.php?selected=99