More Examples Of Patent Incentives Making The World Less Safe
from the hoarding-the-info-needed-to-save-us dept
For years, we've written about how Indonesia has been hoarding bird flu samples and refusing to share them with researchers, because they're afraid that someone will come in and patent the cure, based on the samples they provide, and that will make it much costlier to Indonesia to get the vaccine. Of course, the end result instead might be no vaccine at all... It looks like we may be facing a similar issue with Ug99, a fungus that is aggressively killing wheat crops in Africa and the Middle East -- potentially having a massive impact on global food supplies. FormerAC alerts us to an article about the fight against Ug99, where it's noted that Pakistan won't share some important samples with the rest of the world, again out of fear that some big company will patent what they find:As the breeders keep tinkering, South Asia is bracing for impact. The CDL recently tried to get its hands on a suspicious P. graminis sample from Pakistan that is said to knock out Sr31. But the country is reluctant to share: "Some countries regard isolates of their pathogens as part of their genetic heritage," CDL director Marty Carson says. "I guess there's a fear that we'll patent something off of it."Well, given Monsanto's history of patenting disease resistant crops -- and then over-aggressively attacking anyone who uses such crops (even accidentally), it would seem like a rather legitimate fear. Perhaps, rather than brushing this fear off, the USDA's Cereal Disease Laboratory (CDL) should work to do something to fix things?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cdl, indonesia, intellectual property, monsanto, pakistan, patent
Companies: monsanto, usda
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Monsanto
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I got it!
Seems a bit foolish. But, hey, sometimes waiting for 20 or 30 years for a solution is better than having one next year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I got it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I got it!
Considering that you, Ima Fish, claim to post on Dvorak's blog, I wonder sometimes.
Use the search utility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I got it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: I got it!
B: Sometimes it takes some time to come up with a solution, but that doesn't mean patents are necessary.
Pakistan would rather hide the data from the rest of the world so that they can come up with a solution they can actually use (no patents needed) instead of allowing some other country to come up with a similar solution and deny them the use of it. and frankly, I don't blame them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: I got it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I got it!
No, it's that Pakistan IS able to come up with the cure WITHOUT monsanto and without patents BUT they don't want Monstanto to independently come up with a similar cure, patent it, and deny Pakistan the right to use it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What kills me will be my reason to rest.
As many here, I will leave this world with what is was promised: My work will be done when prescribed by my creator, and my creator alone.
Until then, there's comments I need to create that Mike will have to moderate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course it would have the same effect, as Monsanto and other companies would never sign such an agreement, but at least then it would make them the bad guys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
money money
yea that means YOU
makes me sick to think knowledge is being restricted while people die or are harmed or harm can be done.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: money money
We await Pakistan's solution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: money money
I say that it may be better to die free than to live in bondage. Perhaps these countries are thinking along these lines, and if so, it's rather hard to fault them for such an all-American sentiment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: money money
Yeah, works for me. Better to "die free" than to pay someone to help you live longer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: money money
That's not it. It's more about not being forced to give up an asset than about not wanting someone else to make a return on their investment.
The companies that do this research have a long history of sordid behavior and legalized theft. They have demonstrated that they cannot be trusted. If they were honest players, that would change everything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: money money
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: money money
That doesn't really sound like such a bad idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cant wait for an epidempic ruly to start
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: cant wait for an epidempic ruly to start
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When I read this stories, I only see a gigantic Gollum: My Preciousss.
Oh, it's so steep the climb to Mount Doom...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Read my post between ....
Thanks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Microsoft has plenty of patents and their software is still closed source.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
stupid capitalists don't get it
UM what did people do before the patent system OMG thy WORKED and shared knowledge to advance society
and like the ancient dark ages were now entering one thanks to greedy old men with yacht building programs and as oneposter put it creating agiant GOLLUM
OH MY PRECCCCCIOOOOOUUSS
thanks to free and piracy i know how to do some amzing graphics stuff and video editing
id have had to pay thousands a dollars and waste years of my life the regular way.....
so whose more adapted to invent you that has to wait 3 more years for a piece a paper or me that actually can do it now.
HA
and therein lies the crunch of it all
and if you htink about medicine what happened prior to copyright
MONKS and the red cross will tell you.
FREE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
UM what did people do before the patent system OMG thy WORKED and shared knowledge to advance society
and like the ancient dark ages were now entering one thanks to greedy old men with yacht building programs and as oneposter put it creating agiant GOLLUM"
I deleted a big chunk of your diatribe, since it was sort of a rant about something that seem irrelevant.
You want to know what happened before there were patents? Well, a lot, but it took centuries. Science and engineering creeped before patents, that is what happened. It took decades, sometimes centuries, to address some very basic issues. Funny how technology exploded after the creation of a patent system. Also funny that the countries that adopted patents first also progressed the fastest.
As for medicine prior to copyright, well, I seem to recall doctors getting paid and I seem to recall medicine costing money even before copyrights. Maybe I heard that wrong. But, perhaps sillier, on your part, is that the Red Cross was founded in 1881, WELL after the creation of copyrights, patents and trademarks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
Time passes, progress speeds up. This isn't rocket surgery. Can you prove that it was the patents that sped the progress up or simply the passing of time?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
Incidentally, there was a great article in Invention & Technology magazine regarding innovation. Though the article was essentially an editorial, the author pointed out that the number of great advances in our current era has not (by the author's estimation) been seen since the latter half of the 19th century. Quite a bold statement. If that statement is true, how is "stifling" from patents relevant and why is the "stifling" no longer occurring, or why is it apparently less than it has been for a century?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
If patents lasted half as long as they do would innovation be reduced to a halfrate as well?
Doubt it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
Also, the population was smaller hence there were less people that could contribute to progress.
Also, to say that things progressed slower is nonsense. Lots of progress in both medicine and math resulted without patents. It's just that our current progress builds on past progress and without our past progress our current progress would be untenable without first building its foundations. and that requires time as well. But the ancients progressed a LOT, it's just that we now benefit from their progress, we take it for granted, and we can now build on that progress to progress more. It's not like we're going to progress backwards as a result of patents, it's just that patents slow down our current progress. Imagine if their progress was under patent?
If anything patents are slowing down progress and there is plenty of evidence to support this. There is little to no evidence to say otherwise. Heck, Israel is one of the most innovative nations yet they are more relaxed on IP than most other nations, so at the very least it's evidence against the notion that patents cause innovation, and when taken in context with all the other evidence it contributes to the idea that patents only hinder innovation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
The American history also tells the story of how it happened, most Americans copied trends from Europe and all technologies something that would have been impossible with a strong patent system, the cotton industry saw a big growth largely in part because it did not respect patents at all most inventors that did invent anything didn't get paid ask the guy who invented the spinning mule to see what he got.
To this day most things new are based on ideas that are not patented because it is just not economical to do it so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
Innovation may have happened without patents, but innovation continues to grow at an exponential rate.
As for Americans copying trends from Europe, that may have been true, but just as true is that 12 of the 13 states had their own patent system before the Federal government adopted one.
What few people realize is that patents for new inventions existed in England from before the time America was discovered, so English settlers (and Italian settlers as well) had a history of patents and valued invention prior to coming to America.
One of the earliest patents granted in the colonies was a 1646 patent for a speedier method of sharpening tools. No, he did not copy his method from Europe. Though you fail to provide a definition of "strong" patent system, patent systems existed throughout the 13 colonies, which must mean that the correct statement would be that "...most Americans copied trends from Europe in addition to being incredibly inventive as evidenced by the numerous patents granted by the colonis, something that helped give the United States a technological head start on the world."
As for the cotton industry, the growth would have happened even had they respected patents.
As for your final statement, I absolutely look forward to your supporting documents for that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
I see no reason to believe that number of patents granted is a reasonable measure of innovation. The U.S. patent office grants many patents and most of which are bogus (as evidenced by the fact that we can come up with more examples of bad patents then you can come up with examples of good ones) yet this is hardly a measure of innovation.
"something that helped give the United States a technological head start on the world."
Just because the U.S. had a patent system doesn't mean it's what gave them a technological head start. As noted the U.S. traditionally more lenient on IP than other nations, Jefferson had many concerns about the system initially, and that's what gave them a head start. and what's more is that we flourished the most in sectors that ignored patents the most (ie: mathematics and tech like semiconductors). Israel is one of the most lenient nations when it comes to IP yet they are one of the most innovative. Hollywood itself was built on piracy. There is no evidence to suggest that patent systems or stricter ones encourage innovation, that's just something you made up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
Not to mention 20 years is way too long being that the present value of future returns 20 years from now is hardly enough to justify further current investment in anything. A present value analysis alone should refute a twenty year patent length.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
Wow, you actually got that right. Of course, patents support INVENTION, not innovation. Innovation is supported by success in the market place. Now, how many innovations are based on inventions?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/Patents
The U.S. was initially very strict about what they granted patents on, Jefferson was very cautious about them. So the laws were generally much less restrictive in terms of innovation in the U.S. and that also helped influence our initial advancement. Now the U.S. seems to be more restrictive on patents and granting more patents and the advancement seems to be shifting over to nations with more lenient patent systems like Israel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
As for "advancement shifting," the U.S. continues to be listed as the most inventive and innovative country in the world. However, you would expect that as other nations advance that there should be some shift. China particularly has set internal goals for their patent system in an attempt to become the most inventive and innovative country in the world.
As for "restrictive," you definition is somewhat vague, but to the extent I understand your description, the peak year of "restrictiveness" on patents was 2004. Since 2004, the pendulum has been swinging the opposite direction and continues to swing in the opposite direction as patents in the U.S. have become more restricted by judicial and administrative action.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
Actually Sweden is
http://www.indiatimes.com/Most-innovative-countries/Sweden/photostory/5576193.cms
and they have the pirate party for one.
"China particularly has set internal goals for their patent system in an attempt to become the most inventive and innovative country in the world."
Even if true, this doesn't mean that patents will help them become innovative and inventive.
Also, Japan ranks first, and they don't have the patent system that we have.
http://rankingamerica.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/the-u-s-ranks-3rd-in-innovation/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
http://graphics.eiu.com/PDF/Cisco_Innovation_Methodology.pdf
It seems that the main criteria used to determine innovation in this paper, however, is the amount of patents that one holds.
"Although it is the single best available measure of innovation output, patent numbers are an imperfect
proxy for overall innovation activity."
Of course this is terrible logic because it assumes what IP maximists want to prove, that more patents = more innovation and since there are more patents there must be more innovation. This is nonsense of course.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
"According to Forrester, developed nations such as the US and Japan are spending on average $1,270 per capita per year on research and development with little to show for their science and technology investment. Taxpayer money is being wasted because many politicians and bureaucrats confuse innovation with invention."
http://www.govtech.com/gt/articles/104255
While innovation may be a lovely thing, it is not necessarily the best driver for science and technology development.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
So, if you are going to claim that some people use patents as a proxy for innovation, then those people may have a case since U.S. innovation has dropped with the U.S. share of issued patents in this country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
Actually Sweden is
http://www.indiatimes.com/Most-innovative-countries/Sweden/photostory/5576193.cms
and they have the pirate party for one."
I stand corrected, the U.S. apparently got bumped from the top spot in 2009, maybe before. What surprised me is that the reason they got bumped was due to what I normally consider "non-innovation" factors; high national debt, high medical expensese, an aging population, high debt load, and other factors.
As for Sweden, apparently since the arrival of the pirate party Sweden has fallen far, going from #1 to #10...
http://rankingamerica.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/the-u-s-ranks-3rd-in-innovation/
http:// keithsawyer.wordpress.com/2009/04/09/the-most-innovative-countries/
""China particularly has set internal goals for their patent system in an attempt to become the most inventive and innovative country in the world."
Even if true, this doesn't mean that patents will help them become innovative and inventive.
Also, Japan ranks first, and they don't have the patent system that we have."
Actually, Japan's position has also moved, they are now #9, and you are right, they do not have the system we do. Theirs is much more lenient.
http://images.businessweek.com/ss/09/03/0312_innovative_countries/23.htm
http://keith sawyer.wordpress.com/2009/04/09/the-most-innovative-countries/
As for your comment regarding Chinese patents, their National Intellectual Property Strategy articulates their goal of becoming the world's most innovative country largely be becoming dominant in intellectual property...
http://www.gov.cn/english/2008-06/21/content_1023471.htm
Probably you should go tell them it will not work since you know these things better than them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: stupid capitalists don't get it
However, patent realists also know that patents do not equal innovation. Science is not equal to invention is not equal to innovation, and we would not want that, would we? Science is typically supported by a patronage system. Invention is supported by R&D dollars and is incentivized by patents. Innovation is incentivized by sales. Seems like such a nice, tidy system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@ matthew
fair equatable and gets the bullshit rolling on cures and medicines
LIKE ENOUGH OF THE FRAKING SICK GREED
like OMG some posters here must lead absolutely evil lil lives and step on ants all day and push old ladies into oncoming traffic as a joke of the day and take points for these actions and hang out with others and compare daily point totals
WAKE UP America if you ever want to stop having to fight wars better start treating people fairly
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: @ matthew
You and your little socialist friends can go to Pakistan and help the people find a cure, for free. Good luck. See you when you get back!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: @ matthew
Oh that's right, the government ALREADY funds them and corporations STILL get a patent on the cures anyways. On top of that journals then get a copyright on the government funded research results.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
monoculture will kill us all
A total monoculture; the entire global supply of wheat is a single variety. That goes for most food crops, though. This new fungus strain threatens the world's supply of grain. Beer, bread, whole wheat breakfast cereal, plus wheat gluten is used as a binding agent in a wide variety of foods. The only people that won't be hurt by this are the ones with Celiac's Disease.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: monoculture will kill us all
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can only think that you mean international patents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ok, since I seem to the only tinfoil hat in the bunch...
I mean if they didn't create this fungus intentionally, then why haven't they come out and admitted it? Why aren't more people asking these questions?
This is the only logical way to corner an existing food supply:
1. Eliminate the existing crop, by releasing a targeted fungus.
2. Release a resistant and patented crop to replace it (same seed but with one gene changed, AND PATENTED).
3. PROFIT, PROFIT, PROFIT....
I'm obviously reaching a little bit here, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if it happened in a year or so, just remember you heard it here first....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]