LOL. Confidential ?? A song played on the radio is CONFIDENTIAL ?
no, the fact is that when they use it, they deprive me of the use of it. but when i use an idea you say is yours. you have not forgotten the idea.
two people cannot use the same car for different ends without conflict (except for the most bizarre of coincidences)
the same is simply not true for ideas.
How many good “commissioned” books and films have you recently read/seen? How about letting the MARKET commission the content instead?
Btw, aren’t anti-IP people performatively contradicting themselves by enjoying content (books, films, software) created in this world of abominable IP laws? Wouldn’t mater if they paid for it or they stole it. Without the IP laws, the motive for creating the content would not be there, hence the content that they just enjoyed (stolen or not) would have not been there, too. Tad hypocritical, isn’t it?
Z.
nice fallacy you have there.
An idea is not the same thing as information. Information must be produced using capital and time.
Think of it like fractional reserve money. If someone counterfeits the notes to my bank (also a form of information), they have not deprived me of the notes that I have. However, they have deprived me of the capital behind the notes.
If I understand you, your car is not stolen unless it is not returned before you need it, because it is not scarce.
note how this is only an issue under fiduciary media since under full reserve commodity money, when you print up a fraudulent note you are saying that some definite quantity of precious metal that is in a banks vault is yours, and you literally steal it from me.
its stolen if another deprives me of the use of it without my permission. of course one is not similarly deprived of the use of ones information should another person use information.
Given the legal enforcement of IP, would one rather use those laws with minimal to no effort to draw more profit, or not use those laws to their advantage? Because we have IP enforcement, people use it to their benefit.
Isn’t the slave that’s against slavery contradicting himself when his master gives him food to give the slave energy to perform more bidding for his master?
Aren’t anarchists who use state property of any kind contradicting themselves?
No, he only has the right to the sales proceeds YOU received by stealing his novel and selling it as if it was yours. No need to invoke the strawman of rights to a market value.
Z.
At some point the media holding the information must be accessed in a way that is forbidden by the copyright agreement, hence yes the owner has been deprived of its use.
if you are talking about a physically scarce novel then i admit that the proceeds may be a good proxy in lieu of return of the item itself.
if you are talking about the ‘information’ of the novel then there is no ‘stealing’
As a side note two powerful reasons for artists to create stuff :
- they like to create things they consider beautiful. L’art pour l’art.
- they want fame.
none of the above is ‘protected’ by IP thugs.
the owner has been deprived of the use of the physical media not of the information…
and anyhow, now you are committed to the fallacy that each time any 3rd parties make use of the information which the original ‘copyright breaker’ freely disseminated and made available to them, the original physical property is ‘stolen’ again and again. and again…
This is a good list, I want to add
- that people who want to encourage them to produce will pay them to produce. commission.
Wait, who are you to tell me what I can or cannot do with my own ink and paper?
Z.
I apologize to Pythagoras every time I use his triangle rule. Poor guy doesn’t get to use it when I use it.
i am the owner of physical property that you stole?
I come up with the idea of a flashlight. Someone else uses that idea and makes a flashlight. What have I been deprived of?
What difference does that make? If you allow people to profit from trespassing, that is just an invitation for unlimited criminal trespass.
One cannot trespass information.
There’s no “master” forcing you to buy, steal, and/or enjoy ANY IP created under these IP laws. You could stick to exclusively enjoying “tangible” products, since apparently they are the only ones VALUABLE enough worth your time and dime.
I’m probably the wrong person to answer this for you.
Z.