http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur
You don't know what that means. OR else you are being obtuse. Please answer instead of dodging.
Here is the question you are avoiding:
"For medicine that means we have to employ large teams of people. And if one person can simply take the result of that research, the investment in salaries will never be recovered. If the investment can't be recovered, it will never happen and people will have to do without medical research.
Be honest - your idea means people will be materially worse off. Its a bad one. Why waste your time on something that is a step backwards?"
You don't know what that means. OR else you are being obtuse. Please answer instead of dodging.
Here is the question you are avoiding:
"For medicine that means we have to employ large teams of people. And if one person can simply take the result of that research, the investment in salaries will never be recovered. If the investment can't be recovered, it will never happen and people will have to do without medical research.
Be honest - your idea means people will be materially worse off. Its a bad one. Why waste your time on something that is a step backwards?"
Thanks for the reference to the definition of non sequitur. I knew I was using it correctly. Thanks. It's always good to proof my work.
In answer to your question; Firstly, it may or may not require the employ of large teams of researchers to solve medical issues. That would be another logical fallacy.
However, on the average I suppose that's possible, just not always true. Assuming the average, it also does not follow that having IP will necessarily improve the chances those medicines derived from said research will make it to market, be profitable, or even further future research. That's a lot of assumptions and conditions to satisfy, all of which require imperfect humans to enact.
Why not just use the process of private contract (as if there were any other kind of contract anyway) to convince your employees to not blab their research (keep a secret), and then when you produce the drug; contract with the manufacturer to not disclose or divulge, and then after that, contract with the distributor who delivers to the retailer (pharmacist), to not disclose or divulge, and then last but not least, the consumer; contract with him not to disclose, divulge or reproduce?
There's your rebuttal to your IP laws question.
Good effort. Really - I admire your persistence
But you need to try harder as life is hard and there is a small minority of people who are blatantly dishonest.If one of these crooks gets the medicine into his hands and in flagrant breach of contract, publishes the formula, are you, as an innocent third party, then free to copy the formula and sell the new drug yourself? Under the same brand name as the original investor?
If yes, the original investor is ruined and the world being the cruel place it is, you know this will happen every time. And thus, the research stops unless there is a patent system.
Unless you have some alternative mechanism ? I await your reply with interest.