Brazil and other Latin American countries have many provisions protecting freedom for private use, teaching and research purposes.
For a developing country signing up to an IP system under which most of the important IP assets are foreign... I find it hard to see an argument.
One common ways developing countries use to build their industrial know how and capacity is to get a foreign company to create a development in it. A factory, manufacturing center, or R&D site. Companies are much more reluctant to do so, if the host country is not willing to protect their IP.
hollywood was a place for the film industry to build not just for the sunny weather but because they were far away from edison’s patent lawyers
and of course we all know how america handed intellectual property to china without any hope of enforcing IP, they seem to have developed quite rapidly
but i grant you USA and China may be exceptions, but stealing IP looks very profitable to me
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28330810
If anyone knows even more, it would be greatly appreciated.
-- Ha-Joon Chang, Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective
My country once banned imports so that national industry would be forced to develop. The Lua programming language exists because of this policy. Also, plenty of companies would either license or reverse engineer and clone foreign products. Now my country is some kind of globalist hell. It's painful to see in legal doctrine ideas straight out of WHO, IMF, UN, etc.
It's so disgusting it makes me wish China success despite their repressive state. They have an amazing strategy: entice the west to hand over intellectual property on silver platter, develop industry, get rich and then, who knows? We'll have to watch to see what their end game is.
2[39. Acts not infringing broadcast reproduction right or performer’s right.— No broadcast reproduction right or performer's right shall be deemed to be infringed by— (a) the making of any sound recording or visual recording for the private use of the person making such recording, or solely for purposes of bona fide teaching or research;
Some Elsevier, Wiley, Springer and ACS lobbyists and counsels would lose their income.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karmarkar%27s_algorithm
The patent, linked from above: https://patents.google.com/patent/US4744028
(Unless your comment was about software patents in general, and not India's patent law specifically.)
"In India, the software is not directly patented but it can be granted patent if it is attached with novel hardware, an invention that is unique and capable of industrial use."
So patenting a pure algo or data-structure will face legal hurdles.
Most countries require some physical component or effect, but the rules are often not easy to be sure of.
> Concerning the argument that there cannot be an intermediary when use of copyrighted material post reproduction takes place in the course of instruction... The argument concerning use of an agency is thus irrelevant.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190530065215/http://lobis.nic....
I'm stating the obvious here: the only people who like copyright laws are the 1% who profit from them. The rest of the 99% get to suffer.
Doesn't that mean that most forms of piracy should be legal in India? That is, torrenting movies or music, etc.?
Ofcourse, in this case (SciHub), I am guessing the argument would be that copyrighting research material (science / knowledge) is itself absurd and detrimental to society, and that should trump the interests of the copyright holder.
In developed countries, each update to copyright makes it more restrictive, not less. So maybe the right word isn't progressive, but regressive.
> Bapat, of Internet Freedom, says India’s copyright law is more progressive than many developed countries. “By that I mean that there's a research exception provided under the copyright act. It means that if you are using copyright material for research then it would not constitute infringement.”
And sure enough:
> 52. Certain acts not to be infringement of copyright. — [...] (i) private or personal use, including research [1]
I guess this is tangential to "fair use" exceptions under US copyright lawas.
[1] https://copyright.gov.in/Exceptions.aspx