4 ms·

This take ignores the history of the development of intellectual property rights, convention signatories and WTO. Many, many things were unregulated in the pas

by mc32 5y ago

This take ignores the history of the development of intellectual property rights, convention signatories and WTO. Many, many things were unregulated in the past but ARE regulated today. If they wanted to maintain a policy of ignoring IP, etc., they they should not have joined the WTO and signed conventions that hold them to obligations. These organization and conventions set the stage or provide the framework and law by which signatories are bound. Your argument amounts to: hey, the US and Brazil and the Middle East and many other countries used slave workforces in the past therefore it’s okay for China to do the same today, else they are at a developmental disadvantage. In any event, I'm quite sure any patent [had the concept existed] would have run out by the time they were adopted elsewhere.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ectopod 5y ago
Keeping slaves is inherently harmful. Copying things is not.
- mc32 5y ago
  Then they should not have signed on to the WTO and other organizations that bind them to obligations with regards to IP, among other things.
  - lazide 5y ago
    The history of sovereign nations is the history of ‘consequences or not’, as compared to ‘right or wrong’ - for a great many reasons, including that right or wrong is generally a cultural idea that is rarely consistent across cultures, and is often fluid based on trade offs and not as set in stone as we’d all like to believe. If folks were foolish enough to assume a sovereign nation was going to do what they think is right or wrong (including following a treaty when there are obviously no real consequences despite it benefiting them to not follow it), then they weren’t paying attention to history.
- hiptobecubic 5y ago
  I don't understand this sentiment at all. Basically "thinking isn't work and nothing anyone spends time thinking up has any value."
nextaccountic 5y ago
I would like to remind that the unequal treaties [0], and other treaties signed during the century of humiliation [1] were also actual treaties signed by the corresponding nations. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unequal_treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unequal_treaty [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation
- mc32 5y ago
  Perhaps you should remind China of this as they exercise their economic power with their 1B1R policies[1] in the Indian Ocean basin. [1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/deepening-debt-crisis-in-sri-lanka-stokes-controversy-over-chinese-lending-11642514503 https://www.wsj.com/articles/deepening-debt-crisis-in-sri-la...
  - otrahuevada 5y ago
    Unless they have like a country-wide e-mail address or some kind of HN-exclusive PA system, I don't think this figure of speech really means much other than a childish retort that does not really further dialogue. The validity of treaties signed under duress on the other hand I think really deserves some questioning.
    - skissane 5y ago
      > The validity of treaties signed under duress on the other hand I think really deserves some questioning. Historically, a huge number of treaties have been signed under some degree of duress – most peace treaties are only made when one side is clearly winning, but extracting concessions (however painful) from the losing side is more in the winning side's interests than the risk and expense (in blood and treasure) of continuing the war to a complete military victory. If one took seriously the idea that treaties signed under duress are invalid, the national borders of Europe and North America (among other places) would have to be very different.
      - otrahuevada 5y ago
ballenf 5y ago
> If they wanted to maintain a policy of ignoring IP, etc., they they should not have joined the WTO and signed conventions that hold them to obligations. Entering into agreements with another party that doesn't share your values or over whom you have little power or leverage is a restatement of the advice to avoid being unequally yoked.

by mc32 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

ectopod 5y ago

Keeping slaves is inherently harmful. Copying things is not.

mc32 5y ago
Then they should not have signed on to the WTO and other organizations that bind them to obligations with regards to IP, among other things.
- lazide 5y ago
  The history of sovereign nations is the history of ‘consequences or not’, as compared to ‘right or wrong’ - for a great many reasons, including that right or wrong is generally a cultural idea that is rarely consistent across cultures, and is often fluid based on trade offs and not as set in stone as we’d all like to believe. If folks were foolish enough to assume a sovereign nation was going to do what they think is right or wrong (including following a treaty when there are obviously no real consequences despite it benefiting them to not follow it), then they weren’t paying attention to history.
hiptobecubic 5y ago
I don't understand this sentiment at all. Basically "thinking isn't work and nothing anyone spends time thinking up has any value."

nextaccountic 5y ago

I would like to remind that the unequal treaties [0], and other treaties signed during the century of humiliation [1] were also actual treaties signed by the corresponding nations. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unequal_treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unequal_treaty [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation

mc32 5y ago
Perhaps you should remind China of this as they exercise their economic power with their 1B1R policies[1] in the Indian Ocean basin. [1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/deepening-debt-crisis-in-sri-lanka-stokes-controversy-over-chinese-lending-11642514503 https://www.wsj.com/articles/deepening-debt-crisis-in-sri-la...
- otrahuevada 5y ago
  Unless they have like a country-wide e-mail address or some kind of HN-exclusive PA system, I don't think this figure of speech really means much other than a childish retort that does not really further dialogue. The validity of treaties signed under duress on the other hand I think really deserves some questioning.
  - skissane 5y ago
    > The validity of treaties signed under duress on the other hand I think really deserves some questioning. Historically, a huge number of treaties have been signed under some degree of duress – most peace treaties are only made when one side is clearly winning, but extracting concessions (however painful) from the losing side is more in the winning side's interests than the risk and expense (in blood and treasure) of continuing the war to a complete military victory. If one took seriously the idea that treaties signed under duress are invalid, the national borders of Europe and North America (among other places) would have to be very different.
    - otrahuevada 5y ago

ballenf 5y ago

> If they wanted to maintain a policy of ignoring IP, etc., they they should not have joined the WTO and signed conventions that hold them to obligations. Entering into agreements with another party that doesn't share your values or over whom you have little power or leverage is a restatement of the advice to avoid being unequally yoked.