[quote]rainjack wrote:
How is protecting one’s rights exploiting anything? [/quote]
A corporation shouldn’t be able to own a red cross in the first place.
I don’t think trademarks fall under copyright infringement. Anyway, what you call “profits” isn’t money they’ll spend on luxury cars for their shareholders. It’ll go to charity. The despicable part of the suit is that an omnipotent multinational corporation tries to intimidate a charity organization by dragging them to court. You probably believe everybody is equal in the eyes of justice, but the sad truth is the more money you have, the better your chances of winning.
Again, nobody should be able to own a red cross. Period. I think the chances of J&J losing the trademark in court are quite high in this case. But we’ll see…
IP laws are completely outdated in certain areas. I mean, who needs 20 years anymore to make a return on investment? Half of that should be enough to cover your R&D and make you enough profit to last you for many lifetimes. The only exception to this rule would be the pharmaceutical industry which could get a bit more than the what other sectors get (and that’s already the case anyway!).
IP was established to promote creativity, encourage entrepreneurship, and profit society. What we’re seeing now is the complete opposite. Software patents have killed creativity. Monopolies have emerged and drove small entrepreneurs into the ground. And as illustrated clearly by this case, IP is abused to benefit a handful as opposed to benefiting society. And I won’t even go into the most outrageous case of all: The Bono act.