WHO: Intellectual Property Claims Hindering Research On Deadly Novel Coronavirus 121
New submitter kwyjibo87 writes "The World Health Organization (WHO) publicly expressed dismay yesterday concerning news that intellectual property claims were hindering research on a deadly new emerging virus. Novel coronavirus (nCoV), a member of the same viral genus as the causative agent of SARS, has claimed the lives of 22 people (out of 44 reported infected) and left both researchers and health officials scrambling to develop effective diagnostic tests in addition to possible medications and vaccines against nCoV. Now, however, claims of intellectual property on the new virus are hindering research on nCoV according to the WHO, delaying advancements on tools to prevent further spread of the infection. Stories of intellectual property rights in science hindering advancements in research, particularly in clinical applications, are nothing new; the U.S. Supreme Court recently heard arguments on the validity of patents on the BRCA1/2 genes and has yet to issue a decision. The issue of sharing scientific information in order to promote faster research on emerging pathogens is not limited to intellectual property — a recent article in the journal Nature highlighted a case where Chinese researchers risked having their research scooped after uploading viral sequences to a public database designed aid global scientific collaboration."
intellectual property (Score:5, Insightful)
You freeloaders should be ashamed. It takes a lot of money to do that kind of research, and all these poor, defenseless companies are doing is protecting their investment by patenting the genes they discovered so if and when they choose to further develop it, they will make a reasonable perfectly reasonable 3000% profit on every pill sold.
Not only that, but I think you're all forgetting a very important point here: This virus kills quickly, and any treatment would only last a few days. Where's the profit in that? Sure, it'll kill you, but you as a patient are worth far less than the guy with the limp dick and a few extra bucks to eat pills to make him hard again.
If you want the situation to change, you need to get sick with diseases that are treatable but long-term. We're simply not interested in short-term illness, regardless of whether it kills you or not. Any cures or treatments for a short-term illness are purely accidental and you should be thankful we even bothered to develop it and market it! Ungrateful poor people... jeez. Why can't you all just dry up and die?
Yours Truly,
Big Pharma
P.S. I know you're taking Ritalin your friend gave you to do better on the finals. Contact me privately and I can hook you up with a doctor of questionable repute who will give you your very own legal script. Remember: Unless it comes from Big Pharma, it's a Bad Drug(tm).
Easy way out (Score:5, Insightful)
If I own a bull, and this bull gets loose in a china shop, I'm liable. Why should intellectual property be any different?
If you own a gene, and a virus is using that gene to kill people, well, it's your duty to stop that virus doing what it's doing, and if you don't, expect to pay damages!
(But somehow I don't think the champions of intellectual property want the property metaphor to extend that far.)
Re:Some thoughts about corruption (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, it is corruption if the system is not working as intended... and I don't think anyone would argue that the US political system is working as intended. The entire system is corrupted by money where the rich buy the laws they want to make more money. It is very open and somewhat transparent (and thanks to the rich buying the laws they want, it is "legal") but it is thoroughly corrupt.
Lawrence Lessig makes the case very eloquently here:
http://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim.html [ted.com]
By their own definition... (Score:5, Insightful)
They are murderers.
Hey, if you can equate copyright infringement to theft, you can draw the same comparison between willfully withholding information and murder.
Re:Two suggestions (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Takings Clause and the Police Power Clause (Score:4, Insightful)
None of that is necessary. Just broaden the research exemption, which has been proposed many times.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1124465 [ssrn.com]
http://www.brinkshofer.com/resource_center/85-the-hatch-waxman-act-research-exempt-from-patent-infringement [brinkshofer.com]