Subject: Re: Examples needed against Soft Patents
From: Russell McOrmond <russell@flora.ca>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 12:15:55 -0500 (EST)


On Mon, 27 Dec 2004, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

>     kms> Open peer review != banning pharmaceutical patents.
> 
> Did I say that?  Open peer review (ie, publication of the formula at
> patent application) will shorten the useful life of the patent
> appreciably by giving a leg up to those trying to develop a competing
> product.

  This is a business model issue, not a public safety issue.

  I happen to believe there can be a full spectrum of business models for
pharmaceuticals just as there is for software.  The business model you
discuss where Open Access would give a competitor a "leg up" is just one
narrow model, different than others where Open Access providing for
resource multiplication in the same way that FLOSS provides for resource
multiplication.

> So?  I don't see your point.  Those independents have strong interest
> in keeping their discoveries to themselves in order to maximize the
> first-copy price

  This is another business model issue.  Just because the results are Open
Access published doesn't mean there isn't a premium on the "first-copy
price" which may be the only price.  This is the business model I use for
software development, where I charge my customers an up-front fee once,
with anything I develop for them also distributed FLOSS.  They then get
the benefit of my value-add plus the larger amount of value-add they
receive from developers other than myself doing the same thing.

-- 
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> 
 Have you, your family, your friends (, your enemies) signed the
 Petition to the Canadian Parliament for Users' Rights in Copyright?
 http://digital-copyright.ca/petition/