5 ms·

If you're serious about "reforming" software and standards patents, you should first carve off that area from pharma and bio patents. Make software just plain n

If you're serious about "reforming" software and standards patents, you should first carve off that area from pharma and bio patents. Make software just plain not patentable. Why? Strategically, you don't want those drug people as enemies. They have an extremely powerful lobby in D.C. and many "reforms" that make sense in software would get them up in arms. Choose your battles.

mschuster91 3y ago
Pharma and bio patents are a troubling issue on their own. We're already seeing this with the patent issues surrounding the Covid vaccines in pharma and with Monsanto and their accomplices monopolizing the agricultural high-yield seed markets. They need to be broken as well.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
underlipton 3y ago
I'm not convinced that pharma or bio patents are justified, either. >Strategically, you don't want those drug people as enemies. Oh, actually, yes, can we please ream the m*****f*****s already? To talk about a group of people like that, suggests that they wield far too much power. It gets worse when you learn about what they actually do. Enough already. An "extremely powerful lobby" is not so scary when you outlaw the type of corporate lobbying they engage in. And the American people don't have to let you have a business.
- Pxtl 3y ago
  Without drug patents drug discovery would completely stop. I'm not averse to looking at alternative models for providing revenue to the drug discovery and testing infrastructure (the current model of patents is flawed as hell), but if you like new medications like the COVID vaccines then you have to respect the important of protecting the incentive to create them.
  - senderista 3y ago
    The whole premise is flawed. Drug research is a public good and should be publicly funded. Private funding horribly distorts incentives (only drugs that are lucrative enough to recoup R&D costs are funded).
  - underlipton 3y ago
    >Without drug patents drug discovery would completely stop. I don't believe that, but I won't convince you. Instead, I invite you to try to convince yourself. Imagine a world where drug discovery happens without patents. Talk it out, falsify your propositions as you go, see if you can come up with something workable.
    - Pxtl 3y ago
      I don't doubt that a workable alternative could be invented (and could improve on the deep flaws in the drug patent system), but it would be absolutely necessary to implement that alternative before removing the drug patent system. "Remove the drug patent system" = Upset Kanye "Replace the drug patent system with a new way to encourage drug discovery besides the honor system" = Smiling Kanye
      - underlipton 3y ago
        You can use an intermediary and (quickly) transition. I'm not concerned about preserving economic value or whatever, just research and expertise. It would be nice to get this done before a crisis that tests the system (again).
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  ok, bro. 100% or nothing? Guess which one you'll get?
  - underlipton 3y ago
    Under the current system, it's already effectively "nothing" for >People who can't afford existing drugs >People who can't get corporations to develop drugs for their conditions because they wouldn't be "profitable" >People who can't make their farm's business model work even though they're fully capable of growing the crops people want and getting them to market and so on. But thank you for being my daily encounter with Better Things Aren't Possible Guy.
    - AlbertCory 3y ago
      wishful thinking's always better than facing reality. At least in some worlds.
      - underlipton 3y ago
        Pessimists don't have a monopoly on reality, and society isn't obligated to limit itself to your low expectations just so that you can feel good about being right. Face the reality that the status quo is unsustainable. Throw off your wishful thinking that things can go on like this without repercussion.
        AlbertCory 3y ago
        rather than me wasting even more time responding, why don't you go forth and pursue your all-encompassing patent solution, and report back on how it went?
        underlipton 3y ago
        And so we circle back around to the character of the status quo, where powerful lobbying groups have made it untenable to do anything without just straight-up murking them first. I suppose your suggestion was right: it truly is "100% or nothing." I appreciate your endorsement for the campaign to completely wreck these people's livelihoods for the greater good of society. Hope to see you on the front lines.
Pxtl 3y ago
Not only that, but the patent system is 100% essential to pharma research. Pharma takes a crapload of time from patent to market because of the many layers or trial safety. There are drugs that just plain miss their deadline -- setbacks during the testing process for enough time and then the patent expires and a medication with useful applications get lost to history. If you substantially screwed with that without a very careful and thorough knowledge of the consequences, drug discovery could grind to a halt. Remember, this is an industry that's more than happy to just stop making drugs and let all the sufferers die if it's not profitable enough.
- terragon 3y ago
  Drug discovery has already mostly ground to a halt, so I don't think we'd be breaking much of a system.
  - Pxtl 3y ago
    I think mRNA vaccines provide a pretty strong counter-argument. And do you know how many heart patients are alive today thanks to apixaban? Before that drug people were taking literal rat-poison as an anticoagulant.
    - defrost 3y ago
      > Before that drug people were taking literal anticoagulant as an anticoagulant. and now they are taking a different literal anticoagulant as anticoagulant. w00t! Quick question- will a massive dose of apixaban kill a rat the same as a massive dose of an anticoagulant will? mRNA's are novel, on this we can agree, and I have no issue with their use. Other sectors of the drug market are less novel and more about slightly different for the purposes of starting the clock on drug copyrights and licencing again.
- thayne 3y ago
  Patents as a driver for drug discovery has problems too. The most obvious is it means there is very little incentive to research and get FDA approval for treatments that aren't patentable, even if those might lead to better outcomes than patented treatments. I don't really have a good alternative though.

mschuster91 3y ago

Pharma and bio patents are a troubling issue on their own. We're already seeing this with the patent issues surrounding the Covid vaccines in pharma and with Monsanto and their accomplices monopolizing the agricultural high-yield seed markets. They need to be broken as well.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

underlipton 3y ago

I'm not convinced that pharma or bio patents are justified, either. >Strategically, you don't want those drug people as enemies. Oh, actually, yes, can we please ream the m*****f*****s already? To talk about a group of people like that, suggests that they wield far too much power. It gets worse when you learn about what they actually do. Enough already. An "extremely powerful lobby" is not so scary when you outlaw the type of corporate lobbying they engage in. And the American people don't have to let you have a business.

Pxtl 3y ago
Without drug patents drug discovery would completely stop. I'm not averse to looking at alternative models for providing revenue to the drug discovery and testing infrastructure (the current model of patents is flawed as hell), but if you like new medications like the COVID vaccines then you have to respect the important of protecting the incentive to create them.
- senderista 3y ago
  The whole premise is flawed. Drug research is a public good and should be publicly funded. Private funding horribly distorts incentives (only drugs that are lucrative enough to recoup R&D costs are funded).
- underlipton 3y ago
  >Without drug patents drug discovery would completely stop. I don't believe that, but I won't convince you. Instead, I invite you to try to convince yourself. Imagine a world where drug discovery happens without patents. Talk it out, falsify your propositions as you go, see if you can come up with something workable.
  - Pxtl 3y ago
    I don't doubt that a workable alternative could be invented (and could improve on the deep flaws in the drug patent system), but it would be absolutely necessary to implement that alternative before removing the drug patent system. "Remove the drug patent system" = Upset Kanye "Replace the drug patent system with a new way to encourage drug discovery besides the honor system" = Smiling Kanye
    - underlipton 3y ago
      You can use an intermediary and (quickly) transition. I'm not concerned about preserving economic value or whatever, just research and expertise. It would be nice to get this done before a crisis that tests the system (again).
AlbertCory 3y ago
ok, bro. 100% or nothing? Guess which one you'll get?
- underlipton 3y ago
  Under the current system, it's already effectively "nothing" for >People who can't afford existing drugs >People who can't get corporations to develop drugs for their conditions because they wouldn't be "profitable" >People who can't make their farm's business model work even though they're fully capable of growing the crops people want and getting them to market and so on. But thank you for being my daily encounter with Better Things Aren't Possible Guy.
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    wishful thinking's always better than facing reality. At least in some worlds.
    - underlipton 3y ago
      Pessimists don't have a monopoly on reality, and society isn't obligated to limit itself to your low expectations just so that you can feel good about being right. Face the reality that the status quo is unsustainable. Throw off your wishful thinking that things can go on like this without repercussion.
      - AlbertCory 3y ago
        rather than me wasting even more time responding, why don't you go forth and pursue your all-encompassing patent solution, and report back on how it went?
        underlipton 3y ago
        And so we circle back around to the character of the status quo, where powerful lobbying groups have made it untenable to do anything without just straight-up murking them first. I suppose your suggestion was right: it truly is "100% or nothing." I appreciate your endorsement for the campaign to completely wreck these people's livelihoods for the greater good of society. Hope to see you on the front lines.

Pxtl 3y ago

Not only that, but the patent system is 100% essential to pharma research. Pharma takes a crapload of time from patent to market because of the many layers or trial safety. There are drugs that just plain miss their deadline -- setbacks during the testing process for enough time and then the patent expires and a medication with useful applications get lost to history. If you substantially screwed with that without a very careful and thorough knowledge of the consequences, drug discovery could grind to a halt. Remember, this is an industry that's more than happy to just stop making drugs and let all the sufferers die if it's not profitable enough.

terragon 3y ago
Drug discovery has already mostly ground to a halt, so I don't think we'd be breaking much of a system.
- Pxtl 3y ago
  I think mRNA vaccines provide a pretty strong counter-argument. And do you know how many heart patients are alive today thanks to apixaban? Before that drug people were taking literal rat-poison as an anticoagulant.
  - defrost 3y ago
    > Before that drug people were taking literal anticoagulant as an anticoagulant. and now they are taking a different literal anticoagulant as anticoagulant. w00t! Quick question- will a massive dose of apixaban kill a rat the same as a massive dose of an anticoagulant will? mRNA's are novel, on this we can agree, and I have no issue with their use. Other sectors of the drug market are less novel and more about slightly different for the purposes of starting the clock on drug copyrights and licencing again.
thayne 3y ago
Patents as a driver for drug discovery has problems too. The most obvious is it means there is very little incentive to research and get FDA approval for treatments that aren't patentable, even if those might lead to better outcomes than patented treatments. I don't really have a good alternative though.