Me: IP is protectionism for authors, etc. If you favor IP, why not also favor protectionism for American car companies, or American tire compnaies?
Othey Guy: Now that’s just a strawman-argument! Protectionism is the policy of restraining trade between different states through tariffs, quotas…
The debate is whether the subject matter of IP-laws ought to be recognised as a property similar to land and other physical objects and should thus be granted similar protection from governments and third parties. No-one would say “Property rights is protectionism for landowners, etc. If you favour property rights, why not also favour protectionism for American car companies, or American tire companies?”
I already have in mind what going I’m to respond with, but I felt like posting this.
