So how is the WHOLE of the above not applicable to information as property in an information universe? The creators/owners of “Avatar” do not ‘fully control’ their information property if others can copy it and sell it as theirs. Please respond to my argument that people already recognize real claims over intangible objects (multi-agent virtual universes, online checking accounts, electronic payments, transfers, etc.).
For the readers not familiar with it, in this thread (Information as Property) I attempt to establish an analogy between tangible property in a 3-dimensional universe and information property in a 8x10^9-dimensional binary universe – an analogy that still stands unchallenged, as far as I’m concerned:
"The tangible (physical) property universe comprises of 10^80 cubic meters of known universe, or 5x10^80 atoms in known physical universe. It would only take 266 bits to map (mark) every cubic meter of known universe with a different 266 bit number.
Each separate instance of information ever created (and is about to be created in the forseeable future) – all books, movies, songs, images, software, etc – can be represented by a 10 gigabyte binary sequence. (This size was chosen to accommodate the longest individual piece of information created, such as the movie Avatar, but could be any size without loss of generalization). The size of the informational universe blanketed by all possible 10 gigabyte sequences is 2^(8x10^9) separate instances which is vastly larger than the 2^266 cubic meters of the known tangible universe.
By creating a unique 10 gigabyte sequence of information an author/producer “homesteads” a particular portion of the whole (vast) informational universe (comprised of all possible 10 gigabyte sequences) much in the same way the first appropriator homesteads (has the strongest claim to ownership of) a particular portion of the whole tangible universe (comprised of all 2^266 cubic meters available). The “area” (in the informational universe) that is “homesteaded” (thus owned) by the creator/producer of any 10 gigabyte sequence is defined by all sufficiently similar 10 gigabyte sequences in the “vicinity” of the original sequence and all (signal processing and information theory-based) transformations thereof.
Thus the case for information as property is presented. Explorers and potential “homesteaders” have the vast informational universe at their disposal. Much of that universe is useless (any random 10 gigabyte sequence), just like most of the 2^266 cubic meters of known tangible universe are useless and yet to be claimed (or homesteaded). However, entrepreneurs, explorers, and potential “homesteaders” willing to commit capital and labor to find the valuable pieces of BOTH informational and tangible universe shall be rewarded by a claim of ownership of such discovered property – informational or tangible, regardless."
Z.