Overreaching Patent and IP Laws Stifle Innovation (Globe and Mail)

[DrewWilson]

An outdated intellectual property system is preventing lifesaving medicines and cutting-edge technologies from reaching those who need them the most, a leading expert on patents asserted yesterday.

"If things don't change, we're going to all have fewer medicines to treat whatever the next diseases are," warned E. Richard Gold, director of the Centre for Intellectual Property Policy at McGill University. "Not only will we not develop those drugs for cancer and heart ... but we won't get the innovative breakthrough drugs unless we change."

From communities in Brazil to corporate boardrooms, Dr. Gold and his team found an endemic mistrust among those involved in the patent system that is stifling innovation and preventing technology from entering the market and helping those in both developed and developing nations.

He and his colleagues presented their report, which was seven years in the making, to civil servants and industry observers in Ottawa yesterday.

More... (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080910.wcopyright10/BNStory/National/home)

Via Michael Geist (http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3369/196/) and Digital Copyright Canada (http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/4895)

Bravo! :icon_thum

[mountain_rage]

I've read so many reports which have said the exact same thing, yet lobbyist still seem to be able to convince the government for stronger laws. It really pisses me off that all the experts say the same thing, yet the government remains ignorant or greedy.

[DigitalJunkie]

Politicians can't live without money, didn't you know. Money needed for campaigns, etc., that's why both Dem. & Republican parties are so screwed up! And in turn, we get screwed.

[mountain_rage]

That is why I believe parties should be eliminated from political systems. No collective group to bribe, no partisan manipulation, not left vs right. You vote for you're candidate, and they represent you in the house. If people disagree with his views, its up to him to convince them its a good idea. If he can't convince him then the idea does not pass. Mind blowing concept, probably will never happen.

[DigitalJunkie]

My major concerns is money corrupting system, if we can find ways to lower the cost of entry like using Internet as voting system!

This could be accomplished in the near future, not like the present system which was not the vision of this country's founders had in mind long ago a corrupted system that money can buy.

[Gamer8585]

That is why I believe parties should be eliminated from political systems. No collective group to bribe, no partisan manipulation, not left vs right. You vote for you're candidate, and they represent you in the house. If people disagree with his views, its up to him to convince them its a good idea. If he can't convince him then the idea does not pass. Mind blowing concept, probably will never happen.


Unfortunately it just doesn't seem practically possible to do that in a republic. When the United States first became a country the founders were very distrustful and worried about the formation of political parties, so they crafted the political system in a way to discourage the formation of political parties. However the politicians of the day broke into two large camps the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, and so parties were formed anyway....

[mountain_rage]

If people wanted it bad enough, parties could be eliminated. Theoretically the people still hold all the cards when it comes to politics, very few seem intelligent enough to utilize that power. Under proper guidelines I'm sure parties could be eliminated. It would just require some checks so people don't do backroom dealings. Also, if you can increase the number of candidates running in the riding's it would pretty much end any hope of a collective, reforming a major government.

[Gamer8585]

If people wanted it bad enough, parties could be eliminated. Theoretically the people still hold all the cards when it comes to politics, very few seem intelligent enough to utilize that power. Under proper guidelines I'm sure parties could be eliminated. It would just require some checks so people don't do backroom dealings. Also, if you can increase the number of candidates running in the riding's it would pretty much end any hope of a collective, reforming a major government.

I find the problem to be that most people just don't have the time to put into direct functions of government. People seem smart enough, but keeping up with all of the various polices and considerations necessary for an effective governing structure is too much for any man. The core reasons parties have formed is because they provide (or claim to provide) a shared set of values that voters can use when making decisions.

In an SMP system, like the United States has, parties themselves are as irrelevant as possible providing vague, and sometimes conflicting, sets of principles. Its the candidates themselves that must sell themselves to the party's rank-and-file members. This is also why you don't hear too much about party leaders; they don't really have much sway in determining who gets nominated.

Parties also serve one other important function in government. They create a clear government, and a clear opposition. Whether its alone or jointly there must be a governing party/coalition and an opposition party/coalition for a good and accountable government.

Sure you can increase the number of candidates running for a seat, but in the end there is still only one seat. So it will go to whoever gets the most votes, and candidates will be pressured to get a "big tent," because if they can get a majority they win. So they will band as many people behind them as they can to advance their cause, but they will have to do it with broadly appealing principles and....well you can see where this is leading.

[DigitalJunkie]

Exactly, it's not a problem of we have two or more parties. It's a honest man/woman can't afford the expenses required to run their compaigns. But money is!

[mountain_rage]

My theory is that removing the party system would make politics more accessible as you would only have to win over your riding. You would no longer be competing on the national stage, which I believe happens with parties. That could be a misconception on my part, having trouble finding a statistical breakdown of campaign expenses.

Its also my belief that the party system creates a mob mentality, or pier pressure if you prefer. Rather than voting in line with their constituents, they cave in to pressure in political parties. If you have a system where everyone is independent you no longer have this limitation of pissing off your fellow politicians and being pushed out of the party. So removing the parties in my opinion would increase opposition rather than lower it.

The only problem I see with the system is that it may actually make government really unproductive. With hundreds unable to agree on an issue, it could actually drag issues on far longer than they should.

Either way the system clearly needs to be fixed, everyone can agree on that.

Even tho I am Canadian, my views apply to both the U.S. and Canadian electoral system. Both are way overdue for reform.

[w31n3r]

this is the single best post i've come across here in a while, outside those in the ZP fleshlight thread of course.

That is why I believe parties should be eliminated from political systems. No collective group to bribe, no partisan manipulation, not left vs right. You vote for you're candidate, and they represent you in the house. If people disagree with his views, its up to him to convince them its a good idea. If he can't convince him then the idea does not pass. Mind blowing concept, probably will never happen.

some people vaguely refer to this as true democracy, which is practicable only in Utopia and hence a pipe dream.

[El Comandante]

this is the single best post i've come across here in a while, outside those in the ZP fleshlight thread of course. some people vaguely refer to this as true democracy, which is practicable only in Utopia and hence a pipe dream.

The big problem, in the US, is special interests. People forget that big corporations like Exxon or Proctor and Gamble should have a voice in a democracy. They represent people and their interests too. Unfortunately their voices have buried the voices of ordinary Americans. There is no balance.

Campaign finance reform, lobbying reform and institutional reform is needed to get rid of powerful congressional positions based on longevity and tenure that make a few powerful. We gotta take the short term profit motive out of public service.The powerful obtain tax breaks, favors, subsidies and control the system to the benefit of their short-term interests Take away the overbearing power of special interests and parties must turn to the people for power. Maybe then a true multiparty system can take hold.

I don't think, however, we will ever get rid of parties. People will always group together with other like minded people.