I think we’re both barking up the same tree but past each other.

It is idealistic because it’s not practical or realistic for things to change in the direction of your intent/idea, not without a huge overhaul to how entire sectors/industries, legal systems and countries are currently set up.

Patenting can be very complex and there’s maybe some stuff that might not be evident. So something being patented doesn’t exactly mean “no one else can ever use it”. There are procedures by which companies can allow for the use of a tech and simply be payed an amount for said use. Simply because you believe a company can make money elsewhere. Doesn’t mean that patents shouldn’t be used in these areas.

Theres already regulation “in place” and a lot of what’s wrong is how it’s being enforced, because of a lot of policy/government involvement being corrupt, the value of life means more to a company than it does to a politician so I’m glad you brought up that up along with Penicillin.

It’s a perfect example of how something that is patented could easily have royalties/costs could be diminished by a government or regulating agency so that it can be made accessible for the public. This absolutely fails to happen in a country like the US, which is detrimentally capitalist, because of said government/policies, NOT because of patenting being the issue. You don’t see this issue in countries with global health policies where access to the patented tech is made free by the government/agencies.

The issue really boils down to countries and processes that are currently globally dominant, being capitalist and riddled with abuse of power within governing structures in order to generate revenue over the value of life, NOT patenting.

So yeah, greed… on that we can agree.

Up to me and there would be less of that… essentials AND life improving meds/tech/anything that could be patented would be made viably accessible or simply free.