IP is not about property, it’s about the recognition of a pattern. It’s: “If I am the first to identify that a certain sequence of notes is aesthetically pleasing, no one else can use that sequence of notes without my permission.” It’s completely nonsensical as a concept in and of itself, so it could only be argued from the utilitarian position that it encourages invention and supports inventors and authors. But even that position is extremely weak, and in fact the opposite is true, as a scientist so effectively explains here.
Yes, I would be upset if someone else made money off my idea. I’m also upset over the fact that I don’t own everything I see. I can’t control other people or their property. Such is life.
If someone steals blueprints, they are stealing blueprints. That’s something physical. That’s property. Again, ideas cant’ be stolen.
The question isn’t whether you can own everything you see, but whether or not you can have rights to something you work hard to create. Just because it isn’t physical doesn’t mean you can’t own it. Or at least claim to own it. Ownership still requires enforcement. I just happen to think that the government or non-government courts should recognize intellectual property.
I also think you’re mischaracterizing the way IP works. The law doesn’t say you can’t think of an idea I’ve copyrighted. Just that you can’t reproduce that idea for purposes of selling it or something physical relating to it without my permission.
So for instance, McDonald’s. They own the rights to the brand name, the layout of the restaurant, the product line, etc. Now, you can think about Mcdonald’s without a problem. But you can’t just go make a Mcdonald’s without license from McDonald’s. And that’s because it took years and years to establish that brand and the product line and everything else associated with McDonald’s. Another example is Mickey Mouse. Think how many years it took Disney to make Mickey a household name. But he’s not real. He’s just an idea. Same goes for Superman. There’s a reason Siegel and Schuster are fighting DC over rights to Superman.
I think that intellectual property should be protected as much as physical property to make sure that people cannot benefit from the labor of another without due compensation.
Why not forever?
So might makes right?
This isn’t about might, this is about consensus.
Seems unfair.
Can someone please ban this troll?
Why?
Why is it that whenever someone disagrees with someone on the internet, they think they’re trolling? I’m trying to say that I want to use the same logic I use for protecting private property on intellectual property. How can you be for the state protecting one and not the other? The both are fruits of the labor of someone. Perhaps private property shouldn’t exist either because it’s not fair for someone to own a piece of land? I see your position as being inconsistent with protection of private property.
Well, I suppose it would depend on how long someone had to work on an idea before they patented or trademarked it. But if you can’t do something with it in 7 years, it’s probably time for someone else to give it a shot.
The real question you should be asking, Spidey, is what makes you think that just because you disagree with something that everyone should suddenly change their ways just to suit you? I mean what do they stand to gain from appeasing you?
that’s a non-question bloomj31 coming from you. you are not on equal footing here, don’t you think you should have realized that?
Equal footing with whom?
Your position is that if there is some consensus, then it is OK to do whatever the majority wants to the minority. That, by definition, is might makes right. Since you refuse to acknowledge your position, you are obviously just trolling.
Real property can be stolen. IP cannot be stolen. Enforcement of real property rights does not infringe on the real property rights of anyone else. Enforcement of IP rights infringes on the real property rights of everyone else.
It is blatantly obvious that you have no interest in a real discussion. You just want to hold onto your ideas, regardless of the logic used. You are a troll, and you should be banned.
every issue you bring up, it will be YOU bringing it up. And you advocate initiating physical aggression to get your way. To question anybody elses motives, with that in mind, automatically puts you on the lesser footing.
Why? Why not 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 week, 1 month, 7 months, 2 years, 1 decade, 7 decades, 7 centuries, etc., etc. What makes you such an expert? Are you god?
And bloomj31 the troll refuses to acknowledge that fact.
No, not just some consensus. Vast consensus. Which means that you just want to have the power to tell people that even though they all agree, you don’t so they should listen to you. You’re still arguing that might makes right, just your might and not theirs.
And yes, IP can obviously be stolen. Look at the whole music industry. They’ve got a problem. Every time someone makes a song now, I can just go download it and get it for free. Same thing with movies. Someone takes a year and spends 100 million dollars to get a movie made and I can watch it on the internet for free. Same thing for video games. Modern Warfare 2 leaked like a week before it was released and if they hadn’t caught the kid who did it, the game would’ve probably been available on a torrent file for anyone who wanted to download it on PC. All these projects cost millions of dollars to make and they can be stolen. So obviously, your logic does not square with reality.
No, and my ruling is obviously not binding. But yours isn’t either, even though you seem to think it is.