4 ms·

>But that has very little bearing on this, I simply think that there is something inherently wrong about copyright and/or patents on genetic sequences and/or or

by DenisM 12y ago

>But that has very little bearing on this, I simply think that there is something inherently wrong about copyright and/or patents on genetic sequences and/or organisms. Do you feel differently about software copyright, or book copyright?

jacquesm 12y ago
> Do you feel differently about software copyright, or book copyright? You write a book you own the rights, no contest. But if you take somebody else's book of 5000 pages, and change six paragraphs you should not own the rights to the resulting derived work.
- iwwr 12y ago
  Nature should be treated as GPLv3 or greater. Things like suicide or sterile seeds are DRM.
  - hga 12y ago
    Congratulations! You've just wiped out a very large fraction of the world's maize production: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_seed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_seed and probably some other significant crops. Millions are starving, many more rarely can include meat in their diet. Let me Godwin this discussion by pointing out the lack of information you have about the subject is an example of why command economies preform so poorly. There's just too much information needed to make intelligent decisions. And then we get things like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism because the process is done by people good at politics, and without skin in the game. Farmers have skin in the game. Maybe we should accord their decisions some respect???
    - iwwr 12y ago
      Relaxed IP requirements helped software and hardware develop reasonably fast. Imagine if the big corps like AT&T or IBM had the foresight to patent vital early algorithmic research. Or how hardware may have developed if AMD's early reverse-engineering of Intel chips was deemed illegal. Now biotech is still in infancy as far as genetic engineering. Giving a few corporations the right to 'homestead' nature's IP is going to impede startups or small actors to develop the field. It would also prevent development of tech that involves many inter-related concepts, which could be found in different companies' IP pools. That's besides biotech IP trolls or internecine corp trade wars. So we're not talking about farmers, but the ability of this field to develop quickly like technology did in the last few decades. The technological barriers to entry are falling but in their place IP barriers are erected.
      - hga 12y ago
        Or how hardware may have developed if AMD's early reverse-engineering of Intel chips was deemed illegal. Terrible example, because AMD's right to do that came from their contract with Intel to second source the 8086/8 and 286: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_source#Examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_source#Examples Biotech is extremely rich with small companies, startups, etc., and absent your being able to point out current serious problems, your supposition that the situation might be even better if those small companies were denied IP rights to their developments is at best entirely unfounded.
- DenisM 12y ago
  The code you write is a tiny fragment of the rest that it links with - the OS, the language runtime, the frameworks, PaaS. By your own logic, the code you write should not be copyrightable because it's tiny compared to the whole package received by users. How are you going to make a living then, and who is going to write your software if you can't get paid for doing it? How do you expect large projects to be accomplished, if not by a series of small self-funded steps? If small steps remain unprotected, the only innovation will be in the hands of giant corporations that can afford to build entire stack (e.g. Sun, Oracle, Microsoft, Amazon)...
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    > The code you write is a tiny fragment of the rest that it links with - the OS, the language runtime, the frameworks, PaaS. Sure. And you have a choice for any of those components. > f small steps remain unprotected, the only innovation will be in the hands of giant corporations that can afford to build entire stack (e.g. Sun, Oracle, Microsoft, Amazon)... Let's see: Sun: bust, Oracle: Not exactly a paragon of virtue, Microsoft: convicted in court of all kinds of misdeeds, Amazon: built to a large extent on top of open source technologies that were built by people that just advanced the world of technology on their own dime. Large projects can be accomplished outside of the world that you sketch.

by DenisM 12y ago

jacquesm 12y ago

> Do you feel differently about software copyright, or book copyright? You write a book you own the rights, no contest. But if you take somebody else's book of 5000 pages, and change six paragraphs you should not own the rights to the resulting derived work.

iwwr 12y ago
Nature should be treated as GPLv3 or greater. Things like suicide or sterile seeds are DRM.
- hga 12y ago
  Congratulations! You've just wiped out a very large fraction of the world's maize production: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_seed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_seed and probably some other significant crops. Millions are starving, many more rarely can include meat in their diet. Let me Godwin this discussion by pointing out the lack of information you have about the subject is an example of why command economies preform so poorly. There's just too much information needed to make intelligent decisions. And then we get things like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism because the process is done by people good at politics, and without skin in the game. Farmers have skin in the game. Maybe we should accord their decisions some respect???
  - iwwr 12y ago
    Relaxed IP requirements helped software and hardware develop reasonably fast. Imagine if the big corps like AT&T or IBM had the foresight to patent vital early algorithmic research. Or how hardware may have developed if AMD's early reverse-engineering of Intel chips was deemed illegal. Now biotech is still in infancy as far as genetic engineering. Giving a few corporations the right to 'homestead' nature's IP is going to impede startups or small actors to develop the field. It would also prevent development of tech that involves many inter-related concepts, which could be found in different companies' IP pools. That's besides biotech IP trolls or internecine corp trade wars. So we're not talking about farmers, but the ability of this field to develop quickly like technology did in the last few decades. The technological barriers to entry are falling but in their place IP barriers are erected.
    - hga 12y ago
      Or how hardware may have developed if AMD's early reverse-engineering of Intel chips was deemed illegal. Terrible example, because AMD's right to do that came from their contract with Intel to second source the 8086/8 and 286: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_source#Examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_source#Examples Biotech is extremely rich with small companies, startups, etc., and absent your being able to point out current serious problems, your supposition that the situation might be even better if those small companies were denied IP rights to their developments is at best entirely unfounded.
DenisM 12y ago
The code you write is a tiny fragment of the rest that it links with - the OS, the language runtime, the frameworks, PaaS. By your own logic, the code you write should not be copyrightable because it's tiny compared to the whole package received by users. How are you going to make a living then, and who is going to write your software if you can't get paid for doing it? How do you expect large projects to be accomplished, if not by a series of small self-funded steps? If small steps remain unprotected, the only innovation will be in the hands of giant corporations that can afford to build entire stack (e.g. Sun, Oracle, Microsoft, Amazon)...
- jacquesm 12y ago
  > The code you write is a tiny fragment of the rest that it links with - the OS, the language runtime, the frameworks, PaaS. Sure. And you have a choice for any of those components. > f small steps remain unprotected, the only innovation will be in the hands of giant corporations that can afford to build entire stack (e.g. Sun, Oracle, Microsoft, Amazon)... Let's see: Sun: bust, Oracle: Not exactly a paragon of virtue, Microsoft: convicted in court of all kinds of misdeeds, Amazon: built to a large extent on top of open source technologies that were built by people that just advanced the world of technology on their own dime. Large projects can be accomplished outside of the world that you sketch.