Questioning the Morality and the Benefits of Patenting Plant Life: Multinational Pharmaceutical Corporations and Intellectual Property Rights Laws
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, I set out to illustrate that international intellectual property rights laws are immoral because they allow pharmaceutical corporations to steal and patent plants native to developing countries. I also aim to show how the patenting of drugs creates monopolies that make it difficult for the world’s poorest to access certain drugs, and how these laws promote the destruction of the environment. Disappointingly, the organizations in which the majority of society trusts with conservation efforts help multinational corporations to gain access to plants native to the global South. In return, they get funds from corporations that are currently using biotechnology and want to be viewed as a force for good. Additionally, I give solutions to these problems throughout this paper, but stress that these solutions are within the global capitalist framework and not able to create structural change. The world is currently in crisis mode due to the blatant exploitation of the environment by powerful multinationals, and if capitalism is not changed in drastic ways, it is likely that humanity will be changed in irreparable ways, due to the devastating effects of climate change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".