this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2025
657 points (96.9% liked)

Technology

69391 readers
2578 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter (now X) and Square (now Block), sparked a weekend’s worth of debate around intellectual property, patents, and copyright, with a characteristically terse post declaring, “delete all IP law.”

X’s current owner Elon Musk quickly replied, “I agree.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] veeesix@lemmy.ca 434 points 2 weeks ago (31 children)

So delete all pharmaceutical IP to make drugs accessible to everyone and save taxpayers trillions?

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 72 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (28 children)

This is why it's a mixed bag for me. IP law is kinda important in a capitalist system, which, for better or worse, that's what we have. If someone comes up with a wonder drug that outright cures addiction or something, you'd want that person to be able to recoup their costs before a bigger organization with more capital swoops in and undercuts them on production costs until they're the sole supplier of the drug. The hepatitis C cure drug selling for $70,000 is a great example of this quandary; there's millions of dollars worth of research and clinical trials that went into developing the drug, you'd want the company to be able to recuperate the costs of developing it or else there's less incentive to do something similar for other diseases down the line. Also, though, $70,000 or go fucking die is an outrageous statement.

Of course, what we have for IP law in practice is a bastardized monster, where corporations exploit the fuck out of it to have monopoly control over important products like insulins and life-saving medications that cost cents to produce and allow them to sell for hundreds a dose. That's not the intent of IP law, IMO, and that doesn't really serve anyone.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The problem I mostly have is even when those costs are recouped most companies fight tooth and nail to keep the prices high and unaffordable in order to line the pockets of investors.

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 2 points 2 weeks ago
load more comments (26 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)