<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>gautamdivgi</author><text>I think you&amp;#x27;re missing the point on both the money and the patent laws in India. According to the article
&amp;quot;Successive governments have taken a view that patents should be granted only for major innovations, not updates to existing compounds — allowing domestic manufacturers to make generic versions of drugs at vastly lower cost.&amp;quot; - which basically means you get a patent for real innovation, not minor cosmetic changes to keep your cash flow going.&lt;p&gt;The second - &amp;quot;Pharmaceutical firms say India’s disregard for patents will stifle innovation or make drugs commercially unfeasible — Gilead paid $11 billion to buy the developer of Sovaldi in 2012.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;Note that it didn&amp;#x27;t cost $11B to research the drug but what it cost to buy the company. It is disingenuous to claim that their R&amp;amp;D cost is that high.</text><parent_chain><item><author>runholm</author><text>The issue is that with medicine, it cost vast amounts of money to develop and test a medicine. If there was nothing making sure the investment would pay of, there would be much less money spent developing medicine.&lt;p&gt;I am not saying the system is perfect, and some companies push the prices to the ridiculous to exploit people in need, but removing medical patents altogether would require some other equally strong economic incentive to keep development rolling.</text></item><item><author>dineshp2</author><text>I find the concept of intellectual property and patents ridiculous.&lt;p&gt;What would be the benefit of granting IP over an invention or innovation to a corporation or a group of individuals versus releasing the knowledge under the public domain? Except the corporation or inventor(s) making money off of it, I can&amp;#x27;t think of anything significant. Instead, if the knowledge is made freely available under the public domain, the limitation becomes how well the innovation is used for the benefit of humanity instead of the limitation being access to the invention itself and IP.&lt;p&gt;Maybe the existence of IP and patents was important to get to the present as a way of rewarding innovation, but it&amp;#x27;s high time to look for a better model.&lt;p&gt;I know this is a very complex issue for which there are no simple answers or solutions, but a good starting point might be to think about a society where the motivation for innovation is not financial reward.&lt;p&gt;Taking the example of patented drugs, how is it justified to keep access to life saving drugs beyond the reach of most people(including people in developed nations)?</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Foreigners turn to India in search of cut-price, life-saving cures</title><url>http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/03/06/asia-pacific/science-health-asia-pacific/desperate-foreigners-turn-india-search-cut-price-life-saving-cures/#.VtvsXMtX7qB</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>ekianjo</author><text>&amp;gt; The issue is that with medicine, it cost vast amounts of money to develop and test a medicine.&lt;p&gt;If that is the real issue, then subsidize the costs of clinical research, instead of accepting that everyone pays the price of drugs 10 times what they should cost.</text><parent_chain><item><author>runholm</author><text>The issue is that with medicine, it cost vast amounts of money to develop and test a medicine. If there was nothing making sure the investment would pay of, there would be much less money spent developing medicine.&lt;p&gt;I am not saying the system is perfect, and some companies push the prices to the ridiculous to exploit people in need, but removing medical patents altogether would require some other equally strong economic incentive to keep development rolling.</text></item><item><author>dineshp2</author><text>I find the concept of intellectual property and patents ridiculous.&lt;p&gt;What would be the benefit of granting IP over an invention or innovation to a corporation or a group of individuals versus releasing the knowledge under the public domain? Except the corporation or inventor(s) making money off of it, I can&amp;#x27;t think of anything significant. Instead, if the knowledge is made freely available under the public domain, the limitation becomes how well the innovation is used for the benefit of humanity instead of the limitation being access to the invention itself and IP.&lt;p&gt;Maybe the existence of IP and patents was important to get to the present as a way of rewarding innovation, but it&amp;#x27;s high time to look for a better model.&lt;p&gt;I know this is a very complex issue for which there are no simple answers or solutions, but a good starting point might be to think about a society where the motivation for innovation is not financial reward.&lt;p&gt;Taking the example of patented drugs, how is it justified to keep access to life saving drugs beyond the reach of most people(including people in developed nations)?</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Foreigners turn to India in search of cut-price, life-saving cures</title><url>http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/03/06/asia-pacific/science-health-asia-pacific/desperate-foreigners-turn-india-search-cut-price-life-saving-cures/#.VtvsXMtX7qB</url></story>