3 ms·

True, but what's the alternative? India cannot do something radical like endorsing SciHub or Libgen and risk derailing progress in academic scientific publishin

True, but what's the alternative? India cannot do something radical like endorsing SciHub or Libgen and risk derailing progress in academic scientific publishing. But it doesn't mean India hasn't done anything in the past to disrupt absurd greedy licensing regimes e.g. Generic medicines vs Int'l Pharma Patents. I see every day lives getting saved by generic medicines from 'generic medicine only' stores in India and not to mention India's generic medicines being the lifeline for other poor countries. For this, India's generic medicine industry has been facing the ire from WTO to Interpol[1]. [1]https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/companies/Generic-makers-wary-about-Interpol-pact-with-drug-majors/article20590463.ece https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/companies/Generic-maker...

sebmellen 6y ago
India's generic medicines are a godsend. Not only for poorer countries, but also for the un- or under-insured in wealthier countries like the US.
- Abishek_Muthian 6y ago
  True, I stand corrected. I only recently realized the impact of India's generic medicine in even developed countries when a user in my problem validation platform asked for a solution to 'finding generic medicine equivalent for branded drugs'[1]. [1]https://needgap.com/problems/83-finding-generic-equivalents-for-branded-drugs-medicine-drugs https://needgap.com/problems/83-finding-generic-equivalents-... (Disclaimer: I created this problem validation platform).
  - sebmellen 6y ago
    Very neat platform. How long has it been around?
    - Abishek_Muthian 6y ago
      Thank you, I've been running it for a year and half now.
mncharity 6y ago
> what's the alternative? Not my field, but let's say the societal goal is to continue to transition the journal publishing industry from a business model of customer lock-in, rent seeking, and restrictive access, to a model that's competitive, fee for service, and open-access. As this is a transition from a very profitable high-margin model, to a commodity low-margin model, the industry will be more opponent than cooperative partner in this process. Two policies which seem to me as having been notably helpful, are mandatory open-access tied to government funding of research, and the continued existence of sci-hub. Which suggests spreading the former, and avoiding actions which endanger the near-term existence of the latter. Endorsement doesn't seem needed... merely deferred enforcement. Sci-hub both remedies the societal harm of restrictive access, and reduces industry incentive to slow the transition. Perhaps something vaguely resembling this deal might be where we end up long term, but for now, it seems more like society is in an actively abusive relationship, giving up some of its limited leverage, for an untrustworthy commitment to do less harm, to some, for a time. > generic medicine Nod. Perhaps that makes for an interesting analogy. Imagine pharma had years ago offered India a deal: we'll give you lower-cost access to many medicines for a time, if you shut down your generic medicine industry.

sebmellen 6y ago

India's generic medicines are a godsend. Not only for poorer countries, but also for the un- or under-insured in wealthier countries like the US.

Abishek_Muthian 6y ago
True, I stand corrected. I only recently realized the impact of India's generic medicine in even developed countries when a user in my problem validation platform asked for a solution to 'finding generic medicine equivalent for branded drugs'[1]. [1]https://needgap.com/problems/83-finding-generic-equivalents-for-branded-drugs-medicine-drugs https://needgap.com/problems/83-finding-generic-equivalents-... (Disclaimer: I created this problem validation platform).
- sebmellen 6y ago
  Very neat platform. How long has it been around?
  - Abishek_Muthian 6y ago
    Thank you, I've been running it for a year and half now.

mncharity 6y ago

> what's the alternative? Not my field, but let's say the societal goal is to continue to transition the journal publishing industry from a business model of customer lock-in, rent seeking, and restrictive access, to a model that's competitive, fee for service, and open-access. As this is a transition from a very profitable high-margin model, to a commodity low-margin model, the industry will be more opponent than cooperative partner in this process. Two policies which seem to me as having been notably helpful, are mandatory open-access tied to government funding of research, and the continued existence of sci-hub. Which suggests spreading the former, and avoiding actions which endanger the near-term existence of the latter. Endorsement doesn't seem needed... merely deferred enforcement. Sci-hub both remedies the societal harm of restrictive access, and reduces industry incentive to slow the transition. Perhaps something vaguely resembling this deal might be where we end up long term, but for now, it seems more like society is in an actively abusive relationship, giving up some of its limited leverage, for an untrustworthy commitment to do less harm, to some, for a time. > generic medicine Nod. Perhaps that makes for an interesting analogy. Imagine pharma had years ago offered India a deal: we'll give you lower-cost access to many medicines for a time, if you shut down your generic medicine industry.