About the legality of read-write files of propietary software.
Pages: 12
| One can pose another question: are most of those businesses really necessary for humanity? |
That's not for anyone to decide, in a free world.
@hanst
I highly doubt the factual validity of this statement. I read not one article claiming quite the opposite.
Here is a link I got from the pirate party (referring to Europe): look at page 37. Page 37 claims that 83% of a patients' treatment comes from compulsory health insurance systems. This means that the governments (in Europe) force patients to give profit to pharmaceudical companies. In the same time, pharmaceudical companies are allowed to patent drugs they created with money that comes from the public.
http://www.efpia.org/Objects/2/Files/infigures2006.pdf
I understand that your statement "funds for research have to come somewhere, and most of the spending power lies in the hands of private investors" would indeed lead to conclusions that copyrights and patents are necessary. However most of this statement is a lie consciously supported by the people who have financial interests in it, and delivered to us with the help of the media, paid with profit coming from our ignorance and with the help of our governments.
| Specifically, the funds for research have to come somewhere, and most of the spending power lies in the hands of private investors. |
I highly doubt the factual validity of this statement. I read not one article claiming quite the opposite.
Here is a link I got from the pirate party (referring to Europe): look at page 37. Page 37 claims that 83% of a patients' treatment comes from compulsory health insurance systems. This means that the governments (in Europe) force patients to give profit to pharmaceudical companies. In the same time, pharmaceudical companies are allowed to patent drugs they created with money that comes from the public.
http://www.efpia.org/Objects/2/Files/infigures2006.pdf
I understand that your statement "funds for research have to come somewhere, and most of the spending power lies in the hands of private investors" would indeed lead to conclusions that copyrights and patents are necessary. However most of this statement is a lie consciously supported by the people who have financial interests in it, and delivered to us with the help of the media, paid with profit coming from our ignorance and with the help of our governments.
Last edited on
I am living in europe. It's not everywhere like that, where I live it happens to be. And I am afraid it's nothing like forcing people to give profit to pharmaceutical companies - the money goes to the health insurance, which may be compulsary, but not limited to a specific insurance company. In short, you have to have a health insurance, but you are free to choose particularily what form the insurance should take. The pharmaceutical companies get their money exactly when someone purchases pharmaceuticals from them, I don't see how it matters in this case whether you pay for pharmaceuticals directly with your own money or indirectly through the insurance. The money comes from the public, that is a mass of a private persons, not the state. Either you didn't understand the system, or I don't understand what exactly you are getting at with this.
It goes like this : person's money --> insurance company --> pharmaceutical company --> research into pharmaceuticals. Which is exactly what I said, the spending power comes from private investors (that is a pharmaceutical company in this case, which earns its money by selling pharmaceuticals).
It goes like this : person's money --> insurance company --> pharmaceutical company --> research into pharmaceuticals. Which is exactly what I said, the spending power comes from private investors (that is a pharmaceutical company in this case, which earns its money by selling pharmaceuticals).
| the spending power comes from private investors |
"Private investors" supported from the government, with government lobby, influencing the laws, highly dependent and unable to function without those laws, influencing the doctors with means other than the quality of their products...
Yes, those companies are private. I guess under the similar conditions under which you could call, for example, a monarchy to be a private business. A monarchy is private in the sense that it is from the people in the name of private interests.
[Edit]: I am also from Europe (Bulgarian), have lived 5 years in Germany and currently live in the Czech republic.
[Edit]: To your question "Where I am getting with this":
Patents and copyright laws were made in order to 1) serve people and 2) serve and protect the inventors/researchers. Those laws were granted from society to serve society, and likewise can be taken away. If they are abused or used for purposes other than benefitting people and/or inventors directly, they should be taken away.
Last edited on
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.
Pages: 12