"The richest countries have strong IP protections, generally, that might indicate something."
The assumption here seems to be that their riches come from IP protections. It could be argued that the IP protections are a result of lobbying from rich companies.
I am not arguing that the causation is wrong, but the implied claim does not follow from the observation.
Or it could be the causation is correct, but for a rather unsavory reason, the wealth came from economic rents due to IP protections. The argument that IP defenders need to make is that these innovations could not have happened without strong IP protections, and I’ve never seen a compelling argument for this.
The assumption here seems to be that their riches come from IP protections. It could be argued that the IP protections are a result of lobbying from rich companies.
I am not arguing that the causation is wrong, but the implied claim does not follow from the observation.