Examples of debates that emphasize that intellectual property protection hinders creativity and knowledge flow.

Chairman, judges and other debaters: Hello everyone! I'm the opposing side. Thank you for your speech. We disagree with your statement. We believe that emphasizing the protection of intellectual property rights hinders creativity and knowledge flow. Let's look at the theme of this debate. For some key words, the other debater also elaborated. As we know, intellectual property rights refer to "intellectual labor achievements created by obligees, including patent rights, trademark rights, copyright, etc." All kinds of intellectual creations, such as inventions, literary and artistic works, and signs, names, images and designs used in business, can be regarded as intellectual property rights owned by a certain person or organization, and are exclusive rights granted to qualified authors, inventors or owners of achievements in a certain period of time according to the laws of various countries. Intellectual property is an intangible property with the characteristics of exclusiveness, timeliness and regionality. Protection means taking care of yourself as much as possible so that your rights and interests will not be harmed. Emphasize means to emphasize or emphasize in particular. Emphasizing the protection of intellectual property rights means paying special attention to and strictly enforcing the intellectual property law. Obstruction is interference, obstruction, so that things can not go smoothly. Creative game refers to the game of creative ideas and concepts. Knowledge circulation refers to the transfer of knowledge between people or between regions. I reiterate our view that the protection of intellectual property rights hinders creativity and knowledge flow. The reasons are as follows: 1. Intellectual property rights have the characteristics of exclusiveness, regionality and timeliness. Emphasizing the protection of intellectual property rights will make exclusiveness more exclusive and regionality more regional. Exclusivity and regionality will hinder the circulation of knowledge. Exclusivity, that is, exclusivity or monopoly; Without the consent of the creditor or the law, no one except the creditor may enjoy or use this right. This obviously hinders the circulation of knowledge, and only the exclusive right that is beneficial to the right holder's monopoly or monopoly is strictly protected from infringement by others. Creativity is based on knowledge circulation, and if knowledge circulation is hindered, creativity will inevitably be hindered. Regionality means that intellectual property rights are only effective in the recognized and protected areas, that is, a right protected by a country's laws only takes legal effect within the country, except for international conventions or bilateral reciprocal agreements. Intellectual property rights are both regional and international under certain conditions. This hinders the knowledge flow between regions and between people. 2. It is emphasized that the protection of intellectual property rights will inevitably aggravate the monopoly and hegemony of developed countries over developing countries, make monopoly more monopolistic and hegemonic, and thus hinder the development of creativity and the circulation of knowledge. The cost of patent application in developed countries is much higher than that in developing countries. In order to monopolize the market, enterprises and individuals in developed countries will take the lead in applying for patents in developing countries by virtue of their strong economic strength and super-high scientific and technological level, resulting in monopoly and hegemony. If developing countries want to use this patent, they will have to pay high fees, which will obviously hinder the creativity and knowledge flow in developing countries. 3. Emphasizing the protection of intellectual property rights will lead to higher patent application costs, more complicated patent application procedures and longer time consumption, thus hindering the circulation of knowledge and creativity. Based on the above reasons, we believe that emphasizing the protection of intellectual property rights hinders creativity and knowledge flow. Thank you, too. This debate seems to have appeared in the second college debate competition. I don't remember exactly.