Chairman, fellow judges, fellow debaters: Hello everyone! I am the main arguer of the opposing side, ×××. Thank you for your fellow debater's speech. We do not agree with your fellow debater's remarks. We believe that emphasizing the protection of intellectual property hinders the expression of creativity and the circulation of knowledge. Let’s take a look at the topic of this debate. Some key words have also been elaborated on by the opposing debate partner. We know that intellectual property refers to “the intellectual work results created by the rights holder, including patent rights, trademark rights, copyrights, etc. Various intellectual creations such as inventions, literary and artistic works, and signs used in business, Names, images and designs can all be considered as intellectual property rights owned by a certain person or organization. It is an exclusive right granted to qualified authors, inventors or achievement owners within a certain period of time in accordance with the laws of various countries. Intellectual property is a kind of intangible property with characteristics such as exclusivity, timeliness, and territoriality; protection means trying to protect one's own rights and interests from being harmed. To emphasize the protection of intellectual property is to put special emphasis on it. Emphasize and strictly enforce intellectual property laws. Obstacles are interferences and obstacles that prevent things from proceeding smoothly. Creative expression refers to the development of creative ideas, ideas, etc.; knowledge circulation refers to the flow of knowledge from person to person or region to region. Pass. I reiterate our point of view: the emphasis on protecting intellectual property hinders the expression of creativity and the circulation of knowledge. The reasons are as follows: 1. Intellectual property has the characteristics of exclusivity, geography and time, and emphasizing the protection of intellectual property will make exclusivity disappear. More exclusive, more regional. Proprietary and regional will hinder the circulation of knowledge, that is, exclusivity or monopoly; except for the consent of the right holder or the provisions of the law, no one other than the right holder. This right is not allowed to be enjoyed or used. This obviously hinders the circulation of knowledge. This only helps the right owner’s exclusive or monopolized rights to be strictly protected from infringement by others, and creative expression is based on the circulation of knowledge. , the flow of knowledge has been hindered, then the expression of creativity will inevitably be hindered. Regionality means that intellectual property rights are only valid within the region where they are recognized and protected, that is, except for international conventions or bilateral reciprocal agreements, they are subject to the laws of a country. A certain right protected only has legal effect within the country. Intellectual property rights are both regional and, under certain conditions, international. This hinders the flow of knowledge between regions and people. 2 , Emphasizing the protection of intellectual property rights will inevitably intensify the monopoly and hegemony of developed countries over developing countries. Making monopoly more monopoly and hegemony more hegemonic will hinder the development of creativity and the flow of knowledge. The cost of applying for patents in developed countries is higher than that in development. There are many more countries. In order to monopolize the market, companies and individuals in developed countries will rely on their strong economic strength and ultra-high technological level to apply for patents in developing countries first. Monopoly and hegemony will arise if developing countries want to do so. The use of such patents requires high fees, which will obviously hinder the creativity and knowledge circulation of developing countries. 3. Emphasizing the protection of intellectual property rights will increase the cost of patent application, making the patent application process more cumbersome and time-consuming. This will hinder the flow of knowledge and creativity. For the above reasons, we believe that emphasizing the protection of intellectual property hinders the flow of creativity and knowledge. Thank you! Also, this debate seems to have occurred in the second college debate. I can’t remember exactly