> International law specifically allows poor countries to manufacture their own medicines, bypassing patents that might otherwise apply. > Of course, the rice

> International law specifically allows poor countries to manufacture their own medicines, bypassing patents that might otherwise apply. > Of course, the rice here was not patented -- according to the article, it was just a trade secret. This seems to have little to do with my question, which was: > > I can see personally defending both types of theft, and I agree that they are probably morally equivalent (all else being equal); but I'm not sure that one can make a blanket declaration that people generally do defend Indian patent theft. Do you have references? Did you perhaps intend to reply to my parent (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20788203 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20788203)?