>Trivially. By asserting that without intellectual property protection those drugs wouldn't have been invented
That isn't trivial. It's stupid. It's a completely non-disprovable argument.
Plenty of innovations are created where creators voluntarily yields their rights and plenty of others are probably not created because the creator of it (under employment) isn't hugely keen on creating yet more property for his or her employer to exploit.
hahahaha this place is going downhill. In fairness, maybe it's always been like this during the too-early/way-too-late timeframes.
Sorry, but the world ain't full of copyleft warriors. People put their name on patents, in no small part because they immediately subsequently put that patent on their resumes. Nobody is denying themselves earning power - cash money - in order to protect the public interest from their big bad provider of paychecks. Especially since the public interest, here, means "the companies competing with my provider of paychecks".
That isn't trivial. It's stupid. It's a completely non-disprovable argument.
Plenty of innovations are created where creators voluntarily yields their rights and plenty of others are probably not created because the creator of it (under employment) isn't hugely keen on creating yet more property for his or her employer to exploit.