People need to drop all the political posturing and name calling and realise that this deal with MSF isn't because RAP are just feeling charitable.
They made commitments to do such a deal (tied to their licensing of the IP), and their initial funding was contingent on agreeing to such a deal, so they are just fulfilling their obligations.
As
@dman0 has already recently posted:
From the prospectus:
"In the license agreement of the Licensed IP from UniQuest to ResApp, ResApp agreed to comply with the Global Access Objectives of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This requires that the product be made accessible (with respect to cost, quantity and applicability) to the people most in need within the developing countries of the world."
From Gates Foundation Global Access Objectives guideline:
"To meet the Global Access objectives, as a condition of the grant you agree to conduct and manage project research, project technologies, and information in a manner that enables (a) the knowledge gained during the project to be promptly and broadly disseminated, and (b) the intended product(s) to be made available and accessible at reasonable cost to either (i) people most in need within developing countries or (ii) the U.S. educational system and public libraries, as applicable to your proposed project."
Without the IP and initial grant there would be no RAP today. In ticking this box RAP is also getting a lot of exposure and data, and helping MSF. And moving closer to a revenue deal with MSF and other similar groups down the track.
If some people had done their own research and educated themselves on the history, and obligations, of RAP they would already know all this.
