[ketzu]

> The US is not the entirety of the countries they reserve to themselves.

Sorry, my statement on legislation was ambigious. First, "we" was meant as "we the people of our respective countries," not limited to the US in any way. Secondly, it would probably create some international problems, so a combined effort would be nice. But I think companies should be compensated in such a case (hence "compensated invalidation") in a way that a company can reasonably accept.

> This process was not decided on as the most efficient by any sort of entity with an interest in public health - it's a private company performing a "goodwill" gesture.

I didn't claim that. I said it seems like an okay solution to that challenge (to me). This is independent from who came up with the idea.

As I felt it was phrased in a whay to supposedly make a reader angry, I questioned why that should be the case. Maybe that was over-interpreted by me. For the same reason I would accept this as an actual goodwill gesture. I have no trouble with the idea that richer countries have to pay more for making the development worthwhile and poorer countries benefiting from that at a cheaper price, as it seems like the humane thing to do to me.