首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Human Rights >Give Me Property or Give Me Death: Reconciling Intellectual Property Rights and the Right to Health
【24h】

Give Me Property or Give Me Death: Reconciling Intellectual Property Rights and the Right to Health

机译:给我财产或给我死亡:调和知识产权与健康权

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Though few would argue against the right to health care on moral grounds, we argue that the greater problem has been over the feasibility of such an idea, especially where the “right to health” has never been clearly defined. We discuss a range of problems in balancing the two values: the right of a creator to protect their intellectual property and the right of everyone to enjoy the highest attainable standard of health care. We argue that to strike a balance between these important values, all countries must work to develop policies that take into account the basic health and developmental interests of developing countries. We also argue that important changes must be made to the current IPR system, especially with respect to the production and pricing of basic goods and services needed to fulfill health subsistence rights. These changes must include allowing developing countries access to essential medicines that support the realization of basic health, welfare, and economic development. We examine an alternative patent compensation system that Pogge (2005a23. POGGE , Thomas W. 2005a . Human rights and global health: A research program . Metaphilosophy , 36 ( 1 ) : 182 - 209 . [CrossRef], [Web of Science ®]View all references) has proposed. While we highlight the important aspects of this plan, we also argue that Pogge's scheme falls short in that it does not provide enough incentive to break the short-term profit perspective that corporations possess. We propose two amendments to address this issue in Pogge's scheme. We further argue that we need to replace the dominant state-centric paradigm that views the right to health care in strictly nationalistic terms (as simply problems of the state) with a more cosmopolitan paradigm that reflects the true nature of the relationship between IPR and human rights as a “global public good.”View full textDownload full textRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2011.596057
机译:尽管很少有人会基于道德理由反对医疗保健权,但我们认为更大的问题在于这种想法的可行性,尤其是在“健康权”从未明确定义的地方。我们讨论了在平衡这两个价值时遇到的一系列问题:创造者保护自己的知识产权的权利以及人人享有可达到的最高标准的医疗保健的权利。我们认为,要在这些重要价值观之间取得平衡,所有国家必须努力制定政策,考虑到发展中国家的基本健康和发展利益。我们还认为,必须对当前的知识产权制度做出重大改变,特别是在实现健康生存权所需的基本商品和服务的生产和定价方面。这些变化必须包括允许发展中国家获得支持实现基本健康,福利和经济发展的基本药物。我们研究了Pogge(2005a23。POGGE,Thomas W. 2005a。人权与全球健康:一项研究计划)的替代专利补偿系统。Metaphilosophy,36(1):182-209。[CrossRef],[Web ofScience®]已提出建议。尽管我们强调了该计划的重要方面,但我们也认为Pogge计划的不足之处在于,它没有提供足够的动力来打破公司所拥有的短期利润观点。我们提出两项修正案,以解决Pogge计划中的这一问题。我们进一步认为,我们需要用更加国际化的范式代替反映国家知识产权的核心范式,该范式严格地以民族主义的眼光看待医疗保健权(仅是国家的问题),该范式反映了知识产权与人类之间关系的真实本质。作为“全球公共物品”的权利。 digg,google,more“,发布号:” ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b“};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2011.596057

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号