Scenario: A pharmaceutical company invested millions of dollars to develop a medication/vaccination for a pandemic disease. After this was achieved and sold, someone else stole their results and mass produced the medication. Millions more are saved from death and tragedy because of the cheaper generic drug. Yet the questions remain: What about the next pandemic? Who will research and develop that medication?
This was a simple yet touching scenario that Prof. Shelly displayed to us in our US-China Bilateral Trade Relations course. We were talking about Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) from Chinese and American perspectives. And we came across this dilemma. Maybe to many American students, this is nothing to argue about: Chinese companies’ violations of IPR have already brought great damage to American businesses and to international businesses as a whole. So what can both sides do to amend and improve?
Intellectual Property Rights, from a Chinese perspective
To put it like this, without violating IPR, especially in the software industry, few Chinese students would here now to study and intern. Pirated software, such as Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop, and SPSS, permeate the Chinese market at an astonishingly high percentage. Students begin to learn computer operating in elementary school and onwards. College students further develop their computer skills to fit into the competitive job markets. Millions of computer science and software engineering majors graduate every year from colleges and grad schools into the society. In China, E-commerce thrives and communication technology is ballooning. All of these are dependent on an individual’s access to a computer and the software installed in it. If the software on –the-shelf were priced as they should be in America, China’s economy will stumble and fall.
Protect copyrights, once China has caught up
America has absolutely taken the lead in innovation and invention since the World War II. Yet this also makes America more vulnerable to IPR violations. It’s comparable to rich people fearing robbery and bankruptcy more than poor people. If we follow this logic, things may look a little brighter: once China catches up in advanced technology and has its own modern innovations and inventions, then it will automatically consider protecting IPR as part of its critical national interest. It is only a matter of time for this young country, born in 1949 from a chaotic family with over 100 years wars and civil struggles, to adhere to international norms.
Ethical Dilemma, whether being poorer justifies the illegal means?
Finally, here comes the real question. If we look back at the pharmaceutical company scenario once again, things get complicated. Sure, cheap widespread medicine that can lift half of the world’s people out of a pandemic is extremely beneficial today, but what about the next pandemic tomorrow? If the lack of proper IPR protection continues and companies keep losing money, then what are the incentives for them to develop this kind of medication? This is not only an argument regarding the weakness of capitalism. The ethical dilemma here is about an even broader ethical question: whether being poor justifies the illegal means? We can’t expect all countries to stand at the same starting line or even to reach the same level. That’s far too romantic. Inequality will always exist. Yet loose IPR enforcement allows those below the starting lines of others to “catch up” at a faster pace than is otherwise possible. Once they reach or near that “starting line”, those countries will have to enforce IPR laws to protect their own industries that are no longer infantile. In today’s world, in which all the countries are deeply involved in the international connections of others, no one really hopes that their partners, rivals or even their enemies will actually crash (the “other” will always be needed). Therefore, multilateral compromises are needed to reach agreements and to improve the future for successive generations.
No comments:
Post a Comment