Intellectual property and pharmaceutical drugs: an ethical analysis

The pharmaceutical industry has in recent years come under attack from an ethical point of view concerning its patents and the non-accessibility of life-saving drugs for many of the poor in both less developed countries and in the United States. The industry has replied with economic and legal justifications for its actions. The result has been a communication gap between the industry on the one hand and poor nations and American critics on the other. This paper attempts to present and evaluate the arguments on all sides and suggests a possible way out of the current impasse. It attempts to determine the ethical responsibility of the drug industry in making drugs available to the needy, while at the same time developing the parallel responsibilities of individuals, governments, and NGOs. It concludes with the suggestion that the industry develop an international code for its self-regulation.     

Towards a critique of the moral foundations of intellectual property rights1

Research in recent history has neglected to address the moral foundations of particular kinds of public policy such as the protection of intellectual property rights (IPRs). On the one hand, nation-states have enforced a tightening of the IPR system. On the other, only recently have national government and international institutions recognised that the moral justification for stronger IPRs protection is far from being plausible and cannot be taken for granted. In this article, IPRs are examined as individual rights founded upon natural law, personality development, just reward and social utility. It is argued that these foundations cannot be philosophically sustained. IPRs constitute morally indefensible political developments which aim to reproduce the capitalist division of knowledge and labour at national, international and global levels. The need for such a critical approach to the moral foundations of IPRs has increased in importance as a consequence of their role in justifying corporate power, globalisation policies and harmonisation of such.     

Subsidized abortion: moral rights and moral compromise

The right of indigent women to have government-subsidized abortions is considered in light of the opposing societal opinions on the morality of abortion. Arguments for funding abortions as another facet of health care, and the welfare rights and freedom of indigents, are discussed. A compromise between pro- and anti-abortion factions in society is suggested--the elimination of government funding for elective abortions while continuing to allow them for those who can pay.     

Evoking the moral imagination: Using stories to teach ethics and professionalism to nursing,medical, and law students

Four years ago, as colleagues in our university's law and medical schools, we designed and began offering a course for law, medical, and nursing students, studying professionalism and professional ethics by reading and discussing current and earlier images of nurses, doctors, and lawyers in literature. We wanted to make professional ethics, professional culture, and professional education the objects of study rather than simply the unreflective consequences of exposure to professional language, culture, and training. We wanted to do it in an interdisciplinary course where aspiring professionals could share their self-conceptions and their conceptions of each other, and we wanted to do it by using stories, our primary means for organizing experience and claiming meaning for it. This article tells the story of that experience: why we did it; how we did it; what we learned from doing it.     

Intellectual property and biotechnology: the European debate

The European patent system allows for the introduction of moral issues into decisions about the granting of patents. This feature has greatly impacted European debates about the patenting of biotechnology. This essay explores the European experience, in both the European Union and the European Patent Organization. It argues that there has been great confusion surrounding these issues primarily because the Europeans have not developed a general theory about when exclusion from patentability is the best social mechanism for dealing with morally offensive technologies.     

Democracy, knowledge, and imagination

In public debate, we can discern amostly implicit idea that politics is an affairfor politicians. This contradicts the idea ofthe active citizen, according to which thedifference between politician and citizen ismerely accidental. This article focus upon theprerequisites of such an ideal in modernsociety and especially the classical idea ofprudence as central to good citizenship. Therole of school education is stressed. MarthaNussbaum's concept of ``narrative imagination'is seen as important as well as well aneducation aiming at the Bildung of thestudent.     

Intellectual property and the commercialization of research and development

Concern about the commercialization of research is rising, notably in testing new drugs. The problem involves oversimplified, polarizing assumptions about research and development (R&;D) and intellectual property (IP). To address this problem this paper sets forth a more complex three phase RT&;D process, involving Scientific Research (R), Technological Innovation (T), and Commercial Product Development (D) or the RT&;D process. Scientific research and innovation testing involve costly intellectual work and do not produce free goods, but rather require IP regulation. RT&;D processes involve an unrecognized IP shift from a common IP right in public goods like information and knowledge to private IP in products and other hard assets. The question then is, what kind of IP right: private or common? Since scientific research and innovation testing require openness about adverse findings, and wide, low cost diffusion of results, they require a common, inclusive IP right. Common IP is appropriate to both sharing knowledge goods and recovering the cost of production. Research is furthermore compatible with commercialization and support by other social interests. On the other hand it is incompatible with the exclusionary private IP rights that permit restrictive publication or total suppression of information. Private IP rather than commercialization conflicts with the openness requirements of scientific research and innovation testing. Commercial funding, however, is in principle compatible with research and testing, especially when regulated by a common IP right. This reflects a pragmatic view of the fundamental interconnections of knowledge and other social interests.     

Re-examining intellectual property rights in the context of standardization, innovation and the public sphere

Processes of standardization and innovation exist in creative tension—both complementary and opposing—vital to the advancement of our technological civilization. Intellectual property rights (IPR) bear an uneasy and unclear relationship to these processes. This paper examines the cultural roots of the IPR system and its relationship to innovation, creation and invention; then considers the political economy of IPR in the current business models and practices, the role of standards bodies and the need to re-conceptualize the public sphere. The paper suggests that current IPR practices risk harming our global system by privatizing knowledge and processes that ought to be kept public. Mr. Schoechle received his BS in Administrative Science from the Pepperdine University School of Management in 1973 and his MS in Telecommunications from the University of Colorado, College of Engineering and Applied Science in 1995. He expects to complete his PhD in Communication at the UC in 2002. Mr. Schoechle has been active in computer and telecommunications hardware and software engineering for nearly 30 years. He is an entrepreneur and has participated in many U.S. and international standards committees. Mr. Schoechle currently serves as a faculty member of the Interdisciplinary Telecommunications Program at the University of Colorado, where he also is Interim Director of the International Center for Standards Research (ICSR).     

Self-consciousness,self-determination,and imagination in Kant

I argue for a basically Sartrean approach to the idea that one's self-concept, and any form of knowledge of oneself as an individual subject, presupposes concepts and knowledge about other things. The necessity stems from a pre-conceptual structure which assures that original self-consciousness is identical with one's consciousness of objects themselves. It is not a distinct accomplishment merely dependent on the latter. The analysis extends the matter/form distinction to concepts. It also requires a distinction between two notions of consciousness: one relates to the employment of already formed concepts, the other to the structures of imaginative apprehension that help to constitute (empirical) concepts from the start. We need to see that (1) so far as objects are only conceptualized appearances, the material through which we apprehend them must be reflected in that apprehension itself; (2) the corresponding material consists of a manifold of pre-conceptually active anticipations and retentions concerning the course of one's own experience. The resultant structure imposes an orientation on the world of appearances that does not derive from a concept of oneself as an individual in it, but that nevertheless provides the only possible basis for such a concept. One's self-concept, at least as empirical subject, is simply that ofwhatever subject is indicated, in an appropriate way, by that orientation.     

Privacy, reverie, and the analyst's ethical imagination

The author illustrates varying ways of using and thinking about forms of analytic reverie and the analyst's privacy. He discusses a few different registers from which the analyst can illuminate points of transference-countertransference enactment. The modality by which the analyst communicates these formulations of unconsciously held object relations and defenses varies and includes verbal interpretation through symbolic speech, interpretive action (Ogden 1994a), and, at times, interpretations that involve a construction of the analyst's subjectivity put forward to enhance the patient's understanding of enactments of the transference-countertransference. The author develops a concept, the analyst's ethical imagination, defined as the ways in which we consider and anticipate the implications of our interpretations.