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

[sandor]

I like this thinking,

    It got me thinking..

    IP laws seems generally put forth as both a social and economic 
(political) tools.. I see the very obvious economic uses for such 
devices - but I would like to question the social functionality; the 
supposition of the greater number and/or quality and/or social 
permeation of useful new concepts..

    Have these things been demonstrated to result as the application of 
any IP concepts?
    I am very interested in a historical or theoretical example to 
ponder as I have not been able to create a satisfactory one for myself.
   

    Certainly, in a predominantly economically driven system we can find 
tangled examples where the 'economic' portion of 'socio-economic' has 
been promoted and then carried the other. I seek an example or argument 
that is substantially outside the economic sphere.
    A commonly known counter-example would be the purchase of 
alternative-fuel concepts by oil-interested parties in an effort to 
further their economic goals via the suppressing of alternative markets. 
I think in this example we see an IP device serve economic interests but 
not social; I'm looking for something opposite this..
    An example that shows the use of an IP aspect to mitigate it's own 
negative social consequences, ie - using the system publicly to prevent 
a private entity from owning something strikes me as invalid, as the IP 
construct must solve more than itself to be functionally useful.

Thanks!
-sándor


Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:

>
> Le 22 juil. 05 à 05:15, davidt@public-domain.org a écrit :
>
>>
>> Lastly, the UPD agrees that development must not be a 'pretext for
>> diluting international intellectual property'. We agree that it  
>> should not
>> be a pretext, but instead the very basis from which the patent,  
>> copyright
>> and trademark systems must seek their ultimate justification.
>
>
> I don't agree with that sentence. The justification of patents,  
> copyright and trademark systems is to grant a control on  information 
> : either as an economical incentive, either as a  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;  
>> `intellectual
>> property' is in danger of itself becoming the pretext under which  we 
>> are
>> distracted from the complicated task of promoting development.
>
>
> Defending the idea that Development could be the justification of  
> Intellectual Control (IC ^_- blink for Richard) laws means not only  
> entering the field of Law & Economics, but also entering that field  
> on the wrong basis.
>
> What will we answer when someone will demonstrate that there are  
> better tools than PD to help developing third-world countries 
> ?_______________________________________________
> Upd-discuss mailing list
> Upd-discuss@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/upd-discuss
>
>
>