■"Brazil Mulls Drug Patent Theft as an AIDS Antidote: Eroding property rights will only result in more misery for the afflicted," op-ed by Mary Anbastasia O'Grady, Wall Street Journal, 24 June 2005, p. A13.

O'Grady, whom I respect, raises several important issues against a stance I generally support, causing me to think harder on the subject.

On the face of it, Brazil's threat to break AIDS drugs' patents for use in their country seems like a logical give on the Old Core's part--here largely American Big Pharma.

But O'Grade lists several downsides worth considering:

1) Brazil wants to become a biotech center in the global economy, and companies won't go there if they fear they'll be ripped off

2) Foreign direct investment will suffer

3) Brazil already gets breaks on the drugs that are under patent, and several of the drugs they currently use have no patent protection

4) This is part of Brazil's larger effort within the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to push a "development agenda," and such a push may put them at odds with fellow New Cores India and China, which are making big efforts to strengthen property and intellectual rights in their countries in order to keep the FDI flowing.

5) Brazil ain't exactly poor, seeing that it has a space program and big time aircraft industry.

So is Brazil moving closer in the direction of the Irans, Cubas and Venezuelas of the world? Or is this just further evidence that Brazil's preferred role is that of a New Core pillar that argues for Gap rights?