[pf] What can and should be patented? _Any_ money-making thing?

At 18:10 6/7/2001 -0400, Tom Wheeler sent to PF:
>Slam the Doctor's Door on the Pharmaceutical Companies
>By Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman
> ...
>That's the M.O. of the drug companies these days -- get people sick so
that they can make money treating them.
> ... compelling evidence that many of the new drugs being developed are
unnecessary, dangerous, or both.
> ... We could cut out a big chunk of drug expenditures if we practiced
prevention. ...
>
>Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime
Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based
Multinational Monitor. They are co-authors of Corporate Predators: The Hunt
for MegaProfits and the Attack on Democracy (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage
Press, 1999).
>
>(c) Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman
> Please feel free to forward the column to friends or repost the column on
other lists. ...
>Focus on the Corporation columns are posted at
http://www.corporatepredators.org .
>

· In another news item I'm currently putting into this last week's
compilation (recent: http://davd.tripod.com/GrRR-010629_titles.html ) :-

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=11413&newsDate=3-Jul-2001
  is:
“The U.N. world food body FAO reached a landmark agreement on Sunday ...
The pact followed an anguished debate pitting many poor countries and
environmentalists against multinational corporations and wealthier nations.
... the United States had agreed for the first time in a public forum to
mandatory payments by plant breeders and geneticists developing new crop
varieties in return for access to public seed banks. ...
   But a separate, core issue over the patenting of seeds, where rich and
poor nations differ most, failed to be resolved.
   The biggest stumbling block was always the patents issue and after much
agonised discussion, the meeting decided not to adopt a clause on
intellectual property rights that limit access to seeds. The issue will be
tackled instead by an FAO conference in November.
   Environmental groups say the patenting of food and seeds by
multinational companies threatens food security and access by farmers to
genetic resources.
   The life sciences industry, on the other hand, believes that seed
patents are a vital incentive for research.”


· There are two points;
1. All rule, archy, is done with the consent of the ruled; it may be from
fear of being beaten up, thrown in jail, or being killed, or it may be by
acceptance that more than half of the nation's citizens appear to want the
law, so "we'd better go along with the majority view - maybe they're right".
  But if enough people refuse to be governed (whether by government itself
or by multinationals through government), then the ruling, the governing,
no longer exists. An-archy. (Terrible, what!)

2. Civil or Criminal? In most states today, the critical point for
"refuse-niks" (yes, this is nothing new, or particularly shocking), is
being in court defending your actions before a supposedly impartial judge.
  But which party is trying to get you thrown in jail? The state, acting on
behalf of "all the People", or the complainant company that wants the
breaking of patent laws to stop, and the breaker punished?

· My question:

In the USA, is Patent law Civil or Criminal?

  It should be civil, adjudicated by the state-appointed judge, IMO.

David. (PS.Might we suddenly stop hearing from Jill because she's in jail?
(David MacClement) davd@ihug.co.nz 
http://www.geocities.com/davd.geo/index.html#top
************************************************

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxifP.${encoded_sub_id}
Or send an email To: positive-futures-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com
This email was sent to: archive+pfvs@csf.colorado.edu

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================