Well my name is Rahul Ittal, and i read the comments about Dr Mashal , let me just say this, i was the GM of the Company way back in 94 and all the efforts put in by Dr Mashal were for the betterment of the company, and in those days for any start up company the M.D must look at all the parameters relating to Business, Dr Mashal did that and he did give equal oppurtunities to all, more so to the locals, if the employees do not give the company any return on investment even after being trained then any mangement who has to run the company for its own good has no options but to release them, so all the comments of hypocrsy is rubbish. Dr Mashal will always do what is better for the company . Period, you have the option to work or ship out. but while you are an employee you have to give your best
All comments
17-Dec-2005
17-Dec-2005
la pobreza en mexico es un problema muy serio por ello mucha gente se ha dado ala tarea de investigar un poco de este tema y a mi me da la impresion de que el tratadonde libre comercio nos paso a molestar por lo mismo de que en mexico no se permiten los monopolios
adrian cuevas
13-Dec-2005
Incredible how these rumors get started and nobody pays attention to the details. FTAs don’t raise prices of anti-HIV drugs, and they don’t force generic producers to stop making them. The day after the FTA goes into effect Thailand will still be producing the same drugs and paying the same prices as before.
10-Dec-2005
good article. please mail copy to me.
5-Dec-2005
Es un artículo bastantre superficial y le falta enfoque, no propone nada.
23-Nov-2005
Lamentablemente se trata de un intercambio comercial entre desiguales por tanto, en el caso de la República Dominicana, que fue un gran productor de caña de azúcar, de café, cacao y otros rubros agrícolas no podrán competir con otros países, cuyos productores gozan de cierta protección del Estado. Pura Blanco Tineo
13-Nov-2005
bonjour, vous pouvez voir ces informations sur www.khbarcom.com :
Algérie
institutions
douanes
cordialement
le Maghreb de l’Economie
13-Nov-2005
bonjour, vous pouvez voir ces informations sur www.khbarcom.com :
Algérie
institutions
douanes cordialement
le Maghreb de l’Economie
13-Nov-2005
bonjour,
vous pouvez voir ces informations sur www.khbarcom.com:
– Algérie
– institutions
– douanes
cordialement
10-Nov-2005
somos varios de CHIAPAS BUSCANDO MAS INFO SOBRE EL FORO MESOAMERICANO en costa rica. Tenemos una convocatoria con muy poca informacion, como por ejemplo el lugar y los tiempos. Tambien queremos saber si va a haber un foro de biodiversidad en un pueblo antes del foro en la capital, como en años pasados. Muy agradecidos lo que nos puedan informar,
Ana Monteverde
siemprelamusica@netscape.net
9-Nov-2005
Bonjour Pourriez vous s’il vous plaît me communiquer la liste des produits en question. Merci
30-Oct-2005
Salamo Alaycom C’est MERROUNA Mouhssine je suis de Rabat-Maroc c’est un article trés trés important qui donne une d’ensemble sur la polique américaine fondée sur le vouloir du pouvoir économique, la veille de l’échéc de Seatle USA cherche dans son possible de garder une zone commerciale internationalement étendue sur les pays en voie de developpement j’éspére que cet article soit diffusé sur les sites Web à forte fréquentation par les internautes -Merci
25-Oct-2005
Tal como se expresa en el anterior artículo es imperiosa la necesidad de EUA de expandir su soberanía a costa de las fronteras de los mal llamados "paises subdesarrollados" como Colombia. En vista de que sus productos de primera necesidad saturan sus propios mercados, trata de llenar con basura (bienes de segunda mano y sobrantes del mercado interno) a quienes nos encontramos subyugados a la potencia del Norte. En Colombia y pese a la dictadura Uribista podemos detener el mencionado proceso para evitar el convertirnos es esclavos y depositarios de los desechos del PAIS DEL NORTE.
24-Oct-2005
Why is everybody so surprised about the fact that NAFTA did nothing for Mexico and drove US wages down into the toilet, increased poverty on both sides of the border, drove Mexican companies out of business and increased legal immigration exponentially? Because it was all based on the spurious hypothesis that the ideas of a 17th century Brazilian economist writing about an AGRARIAN economy could be extrapolated to the 21st century world. It assumed facts and conditions that did not exist before NAFTA and certainly weren’t going to exist afterwards. Ricardo’s theory of comparative advantage (the precursor to today’s free trade) assumed that capital was fixed in place (it would not cross national boundaries), that labors costs were the same across all countries and that there would be advantages based upon soil conditions, seeds, water access and rain that would gradually lead to specialization among the countries of the world that would permit each one to capture a niche in some specific food crop or cloth-making crop.
The problem with applying this to today’s economies is that: one, capital is not at all fixed. If anything, the internet and electronic communication have made capital much more fluid. (two) labor costs are not at all comparable and (three) the competition is not among agrarian societies but among manufacturing societies and the big money makers are not food crops. The inherent advantages supposedly going to surface and level the playing field
simply aren’t going to surface. The competition is all being fought over something that Ricardo never contemplated and that was labor costs for reasons that he never envisioned in a world completely different from this one.
SO, HERE WE ARE TRYING TO APPLY AN INAPPROPRIATE, RELATIVELY UNTESTED HYPOTHESIS TO A WORLD FOR WHICH IT WAS NOT INVENTED. I’d say that is the policy-making equivalent of using a screw driver to hammer in nails and then wondering why it takes so long and has disastrous quality implications for the house built that way. We attempted something very similar back in the Gilded Age when there were few tariffs etc. and the results were just about the same. The fact is that societies do better and their economies are stronger when there is not a huge disparity between rich and poor; wages are not just living but stimulate upward mobility and wealth is not concentrated in the hands of a few people.
I have always been against NAFTA and free trade. I saw them for what they were: subterfuges to permit companies to produce goods with huge margins so that CEOs could make gigantic salaries. All of these agreements have put every worker in the world in competition with each other, reduced the aggregate number of jobs, created insurmountable inequities between the haves and have nots; increased poverty everywhere and lowered the standing of living for everyone but the very wealthy. The World is NOW the PLANTATION OF THE RICHEST PEOPLE AND THE MULTINATIONALS and the rest of us are their field hands. These are a particularly cruel joke on Americans because we don’t export that much. We consume 90 percent of what we have manufactured in China.
People need to read the BEA numbers more often.
21-Oct-2005
In response to your reply to Mr Philipson’s article, let me start by saying that I absolutely agree the fruits of your labour should be protected and that copyright is a suitable form of such protection. With regards to the US-Aus FTA, however, I just fail to see how extending the copyright term by another twenty years is better protecting you or other authors. Copyright laws exist to both protect the works of authors/creators, and in so doing encourage/foster creativity in our society. How does extending the term of your copyright for another twenty years AFTER YOU HAVE DIED, do this? Does it really make any difference to an author or creator whether their works are protected for 50 years after their death, or 70? Has the previous 50 year plus life term ever prevented somebody from creating a piece of work? Will the extra 20 years (which they won’t be around to see) really encourage people to be more creative? I seriously doubt it!
The other problem is that, as Mr Philipson points out, the majority of copyright holders today are not the original authors or creators of the works - so who are these laws protecting then? For the most part the holders of copyright are huge multinational corporations, who have compelled creators to assign all their rights in order to have their works published or produced. It was Disney (and Sonny Bono!) that began the push for the extension of copyright in the US, and it is these types of corporations that will ultimately gain from the extension of the term. The fact that Australia is a major copyright importer and the US a major copyright exporter, makes the agreement entered into by our government all the more absurd in terms of the economics of it all. We had absolutely nothing to gain from an extension of our copyright laws - before entering into this Agreement, Australian copyright holders already received seventy years plus life within the US. The problem was that the Americans weren’t making as much as they could here, and on this point I agree 100% with Philipson’s reference to the government’s use of "newspeak". I do not say this to be Anti-American... I say this because I too have read a bit about the topic and I just cannot see how this agreement sits with even the most basic concepts of what copyright is and its objectives. Australia made real "concessions" in relation to IP in the FTA and the sad part is we (and our budget!) are the ones that will have to live with them.
11-Oct-2005
George von Mehren is an amazing lawyer. I am still grateful for his efforts to bring the Cleveland Browns right back to where they belong—here in Cleveland. I’m sure that he will do an excellent job with this case.
9-Oct-2005
Hello Mr. Philipson,
I read your article "Free trade, the new con trick" and my curiousity was aroused enough to send this email (my second ever to a journalist).
Its a big topic, too much for an email, but here are some thoughts.
I have read Richard Stallmans essays, as I can see have you. and yet I cannot understand some aspects of what he and you are proposing. So, if you have time, I would be interested in your reply.
IP is not "difficult" to define. In my case, it represents the content of experiment manuals which support my software and hardware products. I am a (very) small manufacturer, and copyright represents the only protection against copying of my years of labour by larger manufacturers in markets such as USA, where copyright can be enforced (even by small operators like me).
So one specific question to you is: "how should I operate in such a market" ?
Why should I, or any other ’creator’ not be entitled to earn an income from our products by controlling access to them. Living off donations for amending code as Stallman proposes sounds great, except that Im a few decades late for that lifestyle.(and Im not an elite coder ...like 99.9999...% of the population)
I would like more equality in the world also, however I am particularly disappointed with the weak arguments you present (also Stallman). Of course, the multinationals are screwing everyone over, but weak, idealist, utopian visions are not going to matter one bit.
You say ’it is possible to infinitely replicate the artistic talent..." in this digital age.... well it may be possible to replicate "products" of talent but never "talent" itself,.... but talent needs to eat something so what should one do given we are not living in a utopia, nor are we moving towards a utopia.
You say that "technology is making the concepts of IP and copyright irrelevant". It seems to me that this "globalising" world is making sovereignty and boundaries of ever increasing importance, which needs to be carefully considered and upheld where appropriate....hardly irrelevant.... and "technology" cares little for humanity.
After reading Stallman, and your article, I get the impression, sadly, that this mantra of "software = freedom", serves only the microscopic numbers of elite programmers who live in a coded world, muttering how everyone should pay more attention to their cleverness.
This eliteness is also a form of hypocrisy, and forms its own "trade barriers".
One more question to you: "Do you respect other authors rights and avoid plagarism ?"
One reason for doing so is our copyright-conscious culture....for better or for worst.
Whilst I can see that Linux represents an opportunity for groups to get more control over their systems,(and freedom from MS) and Linux is free to most, its relative success alone is not a justification to eliminate copyright protection for artists, craftsmen, writers, designers, architects etc
How about an article that presents realistic ideas about a way forward ...there must be plenty about..... and avoids whining anti-US hype... a popular form of Australian "nothing-speak".
I enjoy NEXT and read it regularly.
Regards,
26-Sep-2005
Ecuador bajo ninguna circunstancia puede ni debe firmar el TLC en las condiciones que los USA pretende imponernos, al seguir "subsidiando" a los agricultores norteamericanos, nuestra producción carente de tecnología de punta, sobre todo de subsidios etc. llevaría al colapso y una aguda crisis socio-económica que agravaría mas la situación de pobreza, marginalidad, inequidad, subdesarrollo, en muchas esferas de la vida nacional, es imperativo por parte del gobierno convoque al pais a una consulta popular para que sea el soberano quien decida sobre este tema tan crucial para nuestro futuro, y asumir el reto con total dignidad y soberanía.
Ing. Agr. Segundo Carrera.
gesmacraos@hotmail.com
Guayaquil
24-Sep-2005
nous souhaitons recevoir la liste des produits exemptés de droits de douane
mon e.mail : bensmainemed@yahoo.fr
21-Dec-2005
And the winner of the gold medal for leaps of logic.......MADRE! Amazing how every problem in the world can be traced back to an FTA with the US.