Re: [Patents] re: UK software company kicked out of US

[Russell McOrmond <russell@flora.ca>]

On Tue, 24 Dec 2002, Philippe Coulonges wrote:

> Oh, by the way, the United States just unlashed one of their mass
> destruction weapons, killing thousands by vetoing any agreement on
> access to essential medicines for poor countries lacking capacity to
> manufacture such drugs themselves.

...

> And please, Mr Aharonian, don't serve us your rethorical arguments on
> this one, as this is not about money, not about legality, it's only
> criminal behavior.


  One of the more balanced reports I have read on the whole issue of 
internationalization of so-called "Intellectual Property" was the report 
written by the Commission on Intellectual Property Rights.

  (Link to report and some media attention)  
  http://weblog.flora.org/article.php3?story_id=246


  Beyond the obvious moral issues, there isn't even credibility on purely
business/economic terms. The historical precedent for simply not honoring
foreign IP at all was set by the USA, who is now trying to deny majority
world countries the very public policy tool which allowed them to create
their domestic industrial capacity.  The hypocrisy is unbelievable, not
that this is the only case where US foreign policy has such obviously
uneven application.


  To quote from:
  http://www.iprcommission.org/papers/text/final_report/chapter1word1.htm

    First, historically IP regimes have been used by countries to further
    what they perceive as their own economic interests.  Countries have
    changed their regimes at different stages of economic development as 
    that perception (and their economic status) has changed.  For instance
    between 1790 and 1836, as a net importer of technology, the US
    restricted the issue of patents to its own citizens and residents.  
    Even in 1836, patents fees for foreigners were fixed at ten times the
    rate for US citizens (and two thirds as much again if one was
    British!).  Only in 1861 were foreigners treated on an (almost wholly)
    non-discriminatory basis.  In his Annual Report for 1858, the US
    Commissioner of Patents noted:

      "It is a fact, as significant as it is deplorable, that of the
      10,359 inventions shown to have been made abroad during the last 
      twelve months, but forty-two have been patented in the US. The
      exorbitant fees exacted of the foreigner, and the severity of the
      offensive discrimination established to his prejudice, afford a
      sufficient explanation of the result .. it might well be concluded that
      the government of this country regarded an invention made beyond the
      seas as something intrinsically dangerous, if not noxious, the
      introduction of which it is morally just and politically wise to
      burden with taxation, just as you would thus burden the importation 
      of some foreign poisonous drug. There is a loftier view of this
      question, and one deemed more in harmony with the progressive spirit
      of the age -- a view which hails the fruits of the inventive genius,
      in whatever clime matured, as the common property of the world, and
      gives them cordial welcome as the common blessings of the race to
      whose amelioration they are devoted."[20]


    Until 1891, US copyright protection was restricted to US citizens but
    various restrictions on foreign copyrights remained in force (for
    example, printing had to be on US typesets) which delayed US entry to
    the Berne Copyright Convention until as late as 1989, over 100 years
    after the UK.  It is for this reason that some readers may remember
    purchasing books which had on the cover the words: "For copyright
    reasons this edition is not for sale in the U.S.A."




  I happen to believe that IP policy is essentially a domestic issue, and
something that if it is globalized at all should be one of the last public
policies to do so.  It is my opinion that special economic interest
agencies such as WIPO should simply be disband until long after critical
multilateral agencies such as ICJ and ICC have been fully ratified
(especially and specifically by military powers such as the USA) and
stabilized.

---


  Seasons greetings to all.  I do hope that as many in the Western world
celebrate the birth of the most influential person from the middle east in
their history, that this will cause them to think with clarity about their
current influence on this region.

> CU
> CPHIL
---
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
 Any 'hardware assist' for communications, whether it be eye-glasses, 
 VCR's, or personal computers, must be under the control of the citizen 
 and not a third party.   -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/