If you invent something, it should be yours to sell. If you have the right to sell it, you will want to keep on inventing. Thus patent laws "add the fuel of interest to the fire of genius," Abraham Lincoln said. Inventors reap profits, society reaps the benefit of innovation.

Not all societies have seen it that way.

The UN Conference on Trade and Development recommended in 1975 that pharmaceuticals be priced below market value in developing countries, so their consumers would not carry the costs of developing new drugs. In 1982, Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi said medical discoveries should be "free of patents [so that] there will be no profiteering from life and death." Lawyers in the Dominican Republic today, facing complaints about pirated satellite television signals, allege that the satellite signals violate their airspace.

Therein lies the international debate over the protection of intellectual property (IP) rights -- the right of inventors to control and sell their own creative product.

For two centuries, patent and trademark protection has nurtured a distinctive strength of the American economy -- its inventiveness. The lack of effective protections overseas is not an abstract legal issue -- it causes billions in losses each year.

By copying and illegally manufacturing drugs invented and patented elsewhere, Argentina's pirate pharmaceutical industry alone causes yearly losses estimated at $500 million.

Piracy costs the U.S. computer and software industry up to $15 billion annually in lost sales. In ex-Soviet bloc countries such as the Czech Republic, Romania and Russia, over 80 percent of software is pirated. This reduces revenues that would be used for investment, innovation and job creation.

Throughout Latin America and the Caribbean, American entertainment products are copied, sold and broadcast illegally. Eighty-seven television stations in Bolivia show pirated programming. In Central America, the rates of piracy in video sales and rentals is nearly one hundred percent.

What can be done?

Under U.S. law, countries with insufficient protection are put on "watch lists" or they are recommended for actual trade sanctions if problems aren't corrected. That's a fair approach: the full benefits of trade should not go to countries that effectively allow inventors' property to be taken without compensation.

But while monitoring, cajoling and sanctions are fair and necessary, real breakthroughs come from enlightened self-interest.

Countries like Chile, Mexico and Brazil have improved IP protection because they view it as essential to their economic future. They're making the right calculation. In a global economy where capital and talented workers can move freely, IP protection provides tangible benefits.

Innovation and investment. Inventors locate where their work will be protected, and international businesses locate where their products and processes are secure. IP protection is therefore a fundamental first step to increased innovation. For a country like Brazil which possesses huge biodiversity resources, IP protection significantly improves opportunities for indigenous pharmaceutical development.

Development and competitiveness. As innovation increases, new businesses start, creating jobs and attracting new capital. New foreign investments transfer state-of-the-art technology to local employees and managers, increasing an economy's competitiveness. In Chile, software designers are exporting hospital management and accounting software to the U.S. and other markets.

Prestige. Strong IP laws are a sign that a country is serious about international business and accepts the legal norms that govern it.

Negotiations are underway to improve IP protection worldwide. A pact signed in tandem with the Uruguay Round trade agreement commits nations to upgrade their IP laws to world standards. Less developed countries have up to a decade to finish the job.

Entrenched interests make the job difficult. In Argentina, for example, pharmaceutical interests have repeatedly thwarted President Menem's efforts to strengthen patent laws.

The decisions countries make affect international interests. But of equal importance, they define the protections their own inventors and artists will receive, and determine the degree to which those innovators will unleash their creativity for their own nations' benefit. When there's a broad understanding of those mutual benefits, countries can get on with the job of creating strong laws and building the judicial systems needed to enforce them.