"The Pirate's Dilemma" - free e-book

[HarryT]

Sorry, but I don't believe that anyone has a "right" to such things. If you want drugs, the company which develops them has a right to charge a fair market price for them - one which will recoup their development costs, and give them a reasonable profit margin too.

In some countries (eg yours and mine) those drugs are centrally funded by the taxpayer. In other countries, they have to be bought by the individual. But either way, they are paid for.

Once the patent on a drug expires, THEN other companies are free to make "clone" copies of the drug at a lower price if they wish. If, however, you deny a company the right to patent rights on drugs, then no drug company in the world is going to spend the billions of $ it costs to develop such things.

[Fitzwaryn]

Originally Posted by tompe

So how many people can die before you have a right? 10000? 1 million? 1 billion?

And how many people will spend years of their life developing new drugs only to see it stolen by someone who feels their "cause" or their "need" takes precedence over everyone else's rights?

More to the point... how many people will have that happen to them and then spend MORE years developing new drugs knowing that it will likely be stolen too?

Your NEED is not a mortgage on my life.

Why should I Create and Produce if the end result is some pirate coming along and Taking it away from me?

[Fitzwaryn]

In the final analysis parts of the world where massive disease and hunger exist don't magically appear. And the don't exist because those countries that are better off are starving them or spreading disease.

Those areas of the world exist due to corrupt and banal governments that care more for their own personal bank accounts than they do for the people.

Or they exist because people put tribal and ethnic values ahead of lower priorities like food, shelter and health.

Stealing from the wealthy (who became wealthy through work and dedication) to give to those who choose not to better their own lives does nothing but perpetuate the very conditions you condemn.

Sending food to Zimbabwe to feed the people that Mugabe is starving by destroying the farms does nothing but keep him in power that much longer and guarantee the situation will not improve.

Don't talk about pirates as heroes. They do nothing but perpetuate the problems they supposedly want to get rid of.

[Adam B.]

Originally Posted by Fitzwaryn

Why should I Create and Produce if the end result is some pirate coming along and Taking it away from me?

Because developing something for the betterment of humanity is the right thing to do?

An example: I work on porting software for the iLiad. I don't expect (or accept) any payment or compensation for the hours I put into it. I do it because the work I do benefits others. This is the whole premise behind the open source movement. There are many other people in the world that do this on a much bigger scale than me. They do it in their spare time, or find other ways to be compensated financially (charging for support, customization, "enterprise" features, etc). Those who can pay, do. Those who can't, get the product for free.

Why can't this be the same for medical purposes? The dying people in poor countries can't afford, and wouldn't be able to purchase the medication at it's market value. If someone else can produce the medication at a lower cost, and save lives, why shouldn't they? The original company looses nothing, as the people would have never been able to afford their product, and would have simply died without it.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Adam B.

Why can't this be the same for medical purposes? The dying people in poor countries can't afford, and wouldn't be able to purchase the medication at it's market value. If someone else can produce the medication at a lower cost, and save lives, why shouldn't they? The original company looses nothing, as the people would have never been able to afford their product, and would have simply died without it.

The appropriate way to do that - IMHO - is for the government of rich countries to purchase drugs from the manufacturer and donate them to poor countries, as a part of their overseas aid programmes. That way the people get the drugs, and the manufacturer gets paid.

The problem with "pirated" drugs is that they DO find their way back to western markets (look at all the "internet pharmacies") and directly take money away from the manufacturer.

[Adam B.]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The appropriate way to do that - IMHO - is for the government of rich countries to purchase drugs from the manufacturer and donate them to poor countries, as a part of their overseas aid programmes. That way the people get the drugs, and the manufacturer gets paid.

Ideally, I agree. However, if it's not done, or if the country refuses that kind of aid, I don't believe the people should just be left to die. (Problems related to overpopulation and whatnot are separate issues, IMO)

The problem with "pirated" drugs is that they DO find their way back to western markets (look at all the "internet pharmacies") and directly take money away from the manufacturer.

I don't know how much business these online pharmacies make. I personally wouldn't trust anything that didn't come from a legitimate pharmacy. I also don't know how much they sell outside of "mood enhancing" or "sexually related" drugs. Somehow I doubt that "life saving" drugs are their primary business.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Adam B.

Because developing something for the betterment of humanity is the right thing to do?

That's a noble desire... and in fact, one that the Pirate movement likes to proclaim. But if the world really ran on that, we'd still be roving the countryside in buckskins, hunting animals by throwing rocks at them. Most people do things for their own personal benefit first... including Pirates. Best to look at this from a realistic perspective, not an idealistic one (which is the chief issue I have with this book so far, but since I haven't finished it, I won't elaborate).

[Adam B.]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

That's a noble desire... and in fact, one that the Pirate movement likes to proclaim. But if the world really ran on that, we'd still be roving the countryside in buckskins, hunting animals by throwing rocks at them. Most people do things for their own personal benefit first... including Pirates. Best to look at this from a realistic perspective, not an idealistic one (which is the chief issue I have with this book so far, but since I haven't finished it, I won't elaborate).

I haven't read the book (yet), but based on the Ars Review, it seems that the book is making the point that pirates doing what's best for them, may in fact bring on changes that are good for everyone.

But as I haven't read the book, I could be off base.

[HarryT]

Adam,

I have nothing against people doing things "for the good of humanity". As you say, you contribute a lot of your time porting apps to the iLiad, and I spend on average a couple of hours a day creating eBooks which I upload here.

But the fundamental point is that it is our free choice to do that. The "pirate" takes that choice away from the person in whom the law invests it, and I consider that to be morally as well as legally wrong. If AstraZeneca choose to donate $500m of their AIDS drugs to the third world, that's their choice. If someone "clones" $500m of drugs to which AstraZenaca holds the patent, and donates those to the third world, the choice has been removed from the people who should be able to make it, regardless of the end result. I'm afraid that I consider it rarely the case that "the end justifies the means".

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Sorry, but I don't believe that anyone has a "right" to such things. If you want drugs, the company which develops them has a right to charge a fair market price for them - one which will recoup their development costs, and give them a reasonable profit margin too.

Does greed set fair market price? Sorry, I am not going to spill any tears over the "plight" of the drug companies. There is so much scamming going on in the medical industry that it should truly make people sick. Take the US genome project- how many "researchers" delayed providing results so that they could PATENT their findings? How does one patent a work of nature anyways?

And, for the past several years, the CEO of the company that handles my medical insurance has "earned" in excess of $400 million per year...."Fair market value"? Profit margin? No- they bloody well rip us off.

[Adam B.]

Harry, out of my respect for you, and the futility of a continued argument, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by wgrimm

Does greed set fair market price?

No, competition does. That's how a free-market economy operates. There is more than one drugs company in the world - they compete with each other. It's certainly not a "monopolistic" industry.

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by HarryT

If someone "clones" $500m of drugs to which AstraZenaca holds the patent, and donates those to the third world, the choice has been removed from the people who should be able to make it, regardless of the end result. I'm afraid that I consider it rarely the case that "the end justifies the means".

The problem with the "capitalism at any cost" arguments in regard to health care is that you are dealing with life and death issues, and the arguments aren't going to be taken very seriously by someone who will die without the drugs.

What would a starving man do if he did not have the $2 a store owner demanded for bread? Walk away hungry? What happens to a patient who cannot afford the treatment that would save his life- he just dies? Because it is the "right" thing to do? I think even Ayn Rand might have a problem with that argument.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Adam B.

I haven't read the book (yet), but based on the Ars Review, it seems that the book is making the point that pirates doing what's best for them, may in fact bring on changes that are good for everyone.

I'm only halfway through, myself, but I'd say that description is essentially correct, with a caveat: The one group that the book (so far) almost dismisses out of hand, is the creator hoping to make a living...

"Artists not getting paid for their work is a problem."

...and that's all they have to say about that.

The rest of it just seems to be about romanticizing and lionizing the Pirate, linking it to Youth Rebellion, and supporting the idea that Convention is there to be attacked, never accepted, and not because you must, but just because you can.

(I'll be glad to comment further once I'm done.)

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, competition does. That's how a free-market economy operates. There is more than one drugs company in the world - they compete with each other. It's certainly not a "monopolistic" industry.

Ah, yes, the "free market." That's why so many people in the US buy their prescription medications in Canada. We have a "free market" here, they say, but many drugs are cheaper in Canada, where they don't have all of this beneficial competition.....