from: http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/111066
IT news, features and forums at heise online UK
8 July 2008, 15:43
Nobel laureate criticises intellectual property rights system
US economist Joseph Stiglitz[1] has warned that intellectual property rights are stifling innovation. According to the Intellectual Property Watch news service, the professor, who was awarded a 2001 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences for his work on the relationship of information and markets, said at the opening[2] of Manchester University's Institute for Science, Ethics and Innovation[3] on Saturday that the intellectual property rights regime "closes down access to knowledge". It was clear, he said, that specific restrictions applied particularly in the patent system.
Stiglitz criticised the current approach of treating copyright and patent rights as "intellectual property". Intellectual property, he insisted, is public property and not something to be "owned". It is difficult to prevent others from enjoying its benefits, he said, because it is fundamentally different to, and should not be compared to, the ownership of physical property. This approach creates monopoly power over knowledge that is often abused. Stiglitz gave as an example the current "patent thicket" in software, which results in anyone who writes a successful software program being sued for alleged patent infringements.
Another problem Stiglitz highlighted was that "the social returns from innovation do not accord with the private returns associated with the patent system. The marginal benefit from innovation is that an idea may become available sooner than it might have. But the person who secures the patent on it wins a long-term monopoly, creating a gap between private and social returns". The system is widening the gap between developed countries and developing countries, claimed Stiglitz, who is also known as a critic of globalisation. Medical care in threshold countries is suffering because patent rights are preventing the production of cheaper generic medicines.
The Nobel Prize winner does not believe that the patent system should be abandoned altogether, but sees a possible solution in restricting property rights to defined, tangible areas as well as to specific countries. Tools such as prizes or government funding could be used to promote access to knowledge and spur innovation in areas where there are well-defined objectives - such as a cure for malaria. John Sulston, a Nobel Laureate in medicine, shares Stiglitz's concerns. He expressed his apprehension about the continued trend towards the private ownership of science and innovation, which was funnelling research into areas that were particularly profitable whilst areas less likely to make money were being ignored. IP is an ideological issue in quarters such as the WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization)[4], Sulston said. Drug companies see any improvements to the patent system as weakening it, but they forget that the system should be a “good servant” - and not elevated to a “theistic level".
In its latest annual report (PDF file)[5], the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC[6]) has now called for the business community to clarify the mechanisms of intellectual property rights for the benefit of the general public. The growing "politicisation" of the patent system and enforcement of copyright is bound to cause concern on the part of those who do not understand the system. The report says that business must focus greater attention on putting forward the very arguments that Stiglitz rejects, namely that commercial copyright not only encourages research and development but it also promotes transparency and the dissemination of knowledge. (Stefan Krempl) /
(ehe[7])
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL of this Article:
http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/111066
Links in this Article:
[1] http://www2.gsb.columbia.edu/faculty/jstiglitz/
[2] http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=1129
[3] http://www.law.manchester.ac.uk/research/centres/isei/index.html
[4] http://www.wipo.int/
[5] http://www.iccwbo.org/uploadedFiles/ICC/policy/intellectual_property/pages/IP_Roadmap-2005(1).pdf
[6] http://www.iccwbo.org/
[7] mailto:ehe@heise-online.co.uk
Copyright © 2008 Heise Media UK Ltd.
2008-07-08
Is this an example of things to come? This is why am against the Treaty of Lisbon
From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7495085.stm
UEMEPs back contested telecoms plan.
In the UK some net users have been warned off file-sharing sites European politicians have voted in favour of amendments to telecoms law which campaigners say could be used to curb privacy online and file-sharing.
Digital rights groups in Europe have formed a loose coalition to highlight their opposition to the amendments.
But MEPs have denied that the amendments are aimed at throwing file-sharers off the net.
MEP Malcolm Harbour, who helped oversee the so-called Telecoms Package, said it was "about improving users' rights".
"There has been a great deal of dismay in the committee at the interpretation being put on these amendments," he told BBC News.
"They have nothing to do with copyright enforcement. The interpretation of them is alarmist and scare-mongering and deflects from the intention which was to improve consumers' rights," he said.
But campaigners say one of the amendments - which could allow governments to decide which software can be used on the web - makes it easier to enforce the controversial "three strikes" law which the music industry is keen to use in order to clamp down on file-sharers.
Soviet net
It would see users receive two warnings if they download copyright material without permission, followed by a complete web ban.
Tentative steps towards such a policy are already underway in the UK with the BPI (formerly the British Phonographic Industry) policing file-sharing sites and informing ISPs of people downloading material illegally.
Virgin Media has sent about 800 warning letters to users and the BPI is threatening to take other ISPs to court if they fail to join the campaign.
France is also about to enact laws that penalise persistent file-sharers.
MEPs voted against Europe-wide legislation to tackle the issue in April 2008.
Campaigners say the changes to the Telecom Packet legislation have more fundamental implications for net freedom.
The Foundation for a Free Internet Infrastructure (FFII) warned that they could create a "Soviet internet" on which only software and services approved by governments would be allowed to run.
"Tomorrow popular software applications like Skype or even Firefox might be declared illegal in Europe if they are not certified by an administrative authority," said a FFII spokesman in a statement.
But Mr Harbour claimed the legislation has entirely more innocent intentions.
"It is about new provisions so that users can find out about new services. It will make price comparison sites easier to set up, it will force regulators to give equivalent access to disabled users and enhance emergency services with caller location," he said.
The vote on whether to approve the Telecom Packet, which is a raft of laws aimed at harmonising European telecoms regulation, takes place in September.
UEMEPs back contested telecoms plan.
In the UK some net users have been warned off file-sharing sites European politicians have voted in favour of amendments to telecoms law which campaigners say could be used to curb privacy online and file-sharing.
Digital rights groups in Europe have formed a loose coalition to highlight their opposition to the amendments.
But MEPs have denied that the amendments are aimed at throwing file-sharers off the net.
MEP Malcolm Harbour, who helped oversee the so-called Telecoms Package, said it was "about improving users' rights".
"There has been a great deal of dismay in the committee at the interpretation being put on these amendments," he told BBC News.
"They have nothing to do with copyright enforcement. The interpretation of them is alarmist and scare-mongering and deflects from the intention which was to improve consumers' rights," he said.
But campaigners say one of the amendments - which could allow governments to decide which software can be used on the web - makes it easier to enforce the controversial "three strikes" law which the music industry is keen to use in order to clamp down on file-sharers.
Soviet net
It would see users receive two warnings if they download copyright material without permission, followed by a complete web ban.
Tentative steps towards such a policy are already underway in the UK with the BPI (formerly the British Phonographic Industry) policing file-sharing sites and informing ISPs of people downloading material illegally.
Virgin Media has sent about 800 warning letters to users and the BPI is threatening to take other ISPs to court if they fail to join the campaign.
France is also about to enact laws that penalise persistent file-sharers.
MEPs voted against Europe-wide legislation to tackle the issue in April 2008.
Campaigners say the changes to the Telecom Packet legislation have more fundamental implications for net freedom.
The Foundation for a Free Internet Infrastructure (FFII) warned that they could create a "Soviet internet" on which only software and services approved by governments would be allowed to run.
"Tomorrow popular software applications like Skype or even Firefox might be declared illegal in Europe if they are not certified by an administrative authority," said a FFII spokesman in a statement.
But Mr Harbour claimed the legislation has entirely more innocent intentions.
"It is about new provisions so that users can find out about new services. It will make price comparison sites easier to set up, it will force regulators to give equivalent access to disabled users and enhance emergency services with caller location," he said.
The vote on whether to approve the Telecom Packet, which is a raft of laws aimed at harmonising European telecoms regulation, takes place in September.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)