[Upd-discuss] Re: [upd-announce] Updates on the A2K Treaty Negotiation in Geneva

[Jean-Baptiste Soufron]

Le 22 juil. 05 =E0 05:15, davidt@public-domain.org a =E9crit :

>
> Lastly, the UPD agrees that development must not be a 'pretext for
> diluting international intellectual property'. We agree that it =20
> should not
> be a pretext, but instead the very basis from which the patent, =20
> copyright
> and trademark systems must seek their ultimate justification.

I don't agree with that sentence. The justification of patents, =20
copyright and trademark systems is to grant a control on =20
information : either as an economical incentive, either as a =20
political tool. Most often it is both.

> When these
> systems however come to impede socio-economic development -- when they
> come to restrict access to essential educational tools, when they deny
> individuals life-saving in the poorest parts of the world; =20
> `intellectual
> property' is in danger of itself becoming the pretext under which =20
> we are
> distracted from the complicated task of promoting development.

Defending the idea that Development could be the justification of =20
Intellectual Control (IC ^_- blink for Richard) laws means not only =20
entering the field of Law & Economics, but also entering that field =20
on the wrong basis.

What will we answer when someone will demonstrate that there are =20
better tools than PD to help developing third-world countries ?=