No related posts.


The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 281: Mikolaj Barczentewicz on Europe’s Digital Sovereignty Push, CADA, and the Implications for Canada
Ofcom Did the Work Canada Plans to Skip: What the UK’s Age Verification Report Reveals About the Bill C-34 Social Media Ban
The Age Verification Bill That Won’t Die: How Bill S-209 Complicates the Government’s Bill C-34 Online Safety Plan
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 280: A Fall Update on Where Things Stand on Canadian Digital Policy Reforms
The Wrong Ban: The Heritage Committee Backed a Targeted Ad Ban for Kids and Stopped Short of a Social Media Ban, Yet the Government Chose the Reverse
Michael Geist
mgeist@uottawa.ca
This web site is licensed under a Creative Commons License, although certain works referenced herein may be separately licensed.
So, repeal C-22
If the drug companies can renege, then so can the goodies that were given to them be taken away.
Seems pretty straightforward to me.
Why aren’t there such things as charitable venture capital orgs? After-all many charities (eg JDRC) contribute to for-profit orgs. It seems to me that charitable donations would go much further if the beneficiaries of donations (R&D orgs) had to contribute returns back to charities. The role of charities like JDRC then would be to encourage R&D firms to take greater risks.
Hey, Michael! Don’t be so ungrateful or narrow minded. What about the bevy of busy lawyers who make gazillions every year doing “research” on their endless litany of pharmaceutical patent cases in the courts? What about all that useful literature and education directed at the medical profession, so that they are better informed about what pills their patients should pop? That takes a lot of “research and development”. And what about all the consumer focus group “research†that goes into those cute Cialis TV commercials?