Home Page
11.17.2004
 Tickets to Ride  
As a segue from Tom Lenard's post yesterday about differential drug pricing, U.S. News & World Report has a column by Mort Zuckerman on "A Prescription for Sanity." He makes the point:
American consumers are subsidizing other countries in the western world. We pay about 50 percent more for patented drugs--but we invest about 20 times as much in pharmaceutical R&D. This is known as the "free rider" problem. Since it is the U.S. market where new breakthrough medicines are invented and introduced, the rest of the world gets a free ride by mandating prices lower than ours. They are still higher than the drug companies' marginal production costs but below the costs necessary to recover the investment required for future research and development. And if these drugs are sent back to the United States, we become a free rider on ourselves, and that situation wouldn't last long.
The delusion that somehow we can all free ride on ourselves in an IP version of a perpetual motion machine is not limited to pharmaceuticals. It underlies the pro-file sharing ethos of the Free Culture Movement, and even the popularity of Tivo, though as someone who dislikes most commercials I hate to admit that. It is the seductive logic behind a good chunk of the open source software movement (not all, because another engine of open source is cooperative financial support from major computer players).

Zuckerman concludes:

[T]he National Institutes of Health advocates using a lot more drugs to achieve the result that really matters--good health. Instead of worrying about restraining or reducing drug costs, we should be focusing on staying healthier and achieving better health outcomes. That's the heart of the matter.
The same logic applies to intellectual content, such as music and movies. The goal is to get more, and more varied, not to get it free. Speaking as a consumer, I think not enough money goes to the creative community, and I wait impatiently for the Internet to change this.

posted by James DeLong : 11/17/2004 08:06:43 AM

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

 

IPcentral WebLog
Blog Main
Recent Posts
  Differential pricing is good for your health
MPAA Law Suits
Sharing Homework?
Pay per Download P2P?
Still More Grokster
Jonathan Zittrain Responds
The Genius of Ray Charles
Encyclopedic Open Source
UN Working Group on Internet Governance
Heritage Foundation on Movies Go to Court
Archives by Month
  December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
Links
  PFF Blog
Atom.xml Site Feed
   
 
Home Page IPcentral Weblog - Intellectual Property and Copyright Commentary
Home Page
11.17.2004
 Tickets to Ride  
As a segue from Tom Lenard's post yesterday about differential drug pricing, U.S. News & World Report has a column by Mort Zuckerman on "A Prescription for Sanity." He makes the point:
American consumers are subsidizing other countries in the western world. We pay about 50 percent more for patented drugs--but we invest about 20 times as much in pharmaceutical R&D. This is known as the "free rider" problem. Since it is the U.S. market where new breakthrough medicines are invented and introduced, the rest of the world gets a free ride by mandating prices lower than ours. They are still higher than the drug companies' marginal production costs but below the costs necessary to recover the investment required for future research and development. And if these drugs are sent back to the United States, we become a free rider on ourselves, and that situation wouldn't last long.
The delusion that somehow we can all free ride on ourselves in an IP version of a perpetual motion machine is not limited to pharmaceuticals. It underlies the pro-file sharing ethos of the Free Culture Movement, and even the popularity of Tivo, though as someone who dislikes most commercials I hate to admit that. It is the seductive logic behind a good chunk of the open source software movement (not all, because another engine of open source is cooperative financial support from major computer players).

Zuckerman concludes:

[T]he National Institutes of Health advocates using a lot more drugs to achieve the result that really matters--good health. Instead of worrying about restraining or reducing drug costs, we should be focusing on staying healthier and achieving better health outcomes. That's the heart of the matter.
The same logic applies to intellectual content, such as music and movies. The goal is to get more, and more varied, not to get it free. Speaking as a consumer, I think not enough money goes to the creative community, and I wait impatiently for the Internet to change this.

posted by James DeLong : 11/17/2004 08:06:43 AM

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

 

IPcentral WebLog
Blog Main
Recent Posts
  Differential pricing is good for your health
MPAA Law Suits
Sharing Homework?
Pay per Download P2P?
Still More Grokster
Jonathan Zittrain Responds
The Genius of Ray Charles
Encyclopedic Open Source
UN Working Group on Internet Governance
Heritage Foundation on Movies Go to Court
Archives by Month
  December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
Links
  PFF Blog
Atom.xml Site Feed
   
 
Home Page