So the cat is out of the bag. Intellectual communism, like all other forms of communism, is the result of jealousy and anger at the success of others.
My claim wasn’t about protecting out-dated industries. Instead, it was about protecting industries that would otherwise be bankrupt, whether or not they are out-dated.
Thus, the cry in favor of IP.
Many industries would go bankrupt if they had to self-produce their security, and all industries would go bankrupt if thieves were protected by the state.
The idea, script content, art as it is preceived, and title of “avatar” do not belong to anyone. The physical by products of making the movie do. Because people are allowed to have a monopoly on the use of an idea, they are grossly over paid. Its not the other way around, that I think they are grossly over paid therefore there is no ip. No, there is no ip therefore grossly overpaid.
No, they wouldn’t go bankrupt since all pirate copiers would be forced to go out of business. And since, as a cinema, you can’t hide from public like a drug dealer, a cinema that collaborates with pirate copiers would be easily identifiable and hence wouldn’t dare violating IP law.
The horse and buggy industry went out of business, because competition delivered a way better product: automobiles. In the case of IP, however, “competition” wouldn’t deliver a better product, just a cheaper one. And the only reason they can have it cheaper is, because they didn’t have any production expenses. Therefore, if pirate copiers were free to go into business with cinemas and consumers, they would, step by step, kill their host, the film industry, like parasites, whereas the car industry can perfectly prosper with or without any buggy factory
What exactly prevented you all from making a movie like Avatar before Cameron? Was it IP law, or your own deficient skills?
You lost me.
I hadn’t conceived of the idea, so neither. Btw, where are you going with this?
I tried this argument before. Like all communists, they don’t care who will suffer or how much as a result of their principles. They simply want free stuff now and think private property is unfair.
No I didn’t. It’s the basic principle of the division of labor applied to protecting property rights.
Bullshit. All we’ve heard on this topic for weeks is that Avatar is just the story of Pocahontas retold. The idea has been around forever.
Why did you not make Avatar before Cameron?
After or before they have pirated? If it is after they have pirated, then they have already done the damage.
Why wouldn’t the same be true without IP?
Quality is subjective and there is always opportunity costs. There would be a cost for acquiring the pirated movie. Please rewrite your statement fixing the these flaws in your argument.
You lost me in the sense that it is a non sequitur. What was the connection from my comment to yours?
He did, he just wasn’t first to the patent office. gg.
That the fact that protecting theft destroys an industry is not an argument against property rights, it is an argument in favor.
Because although the story may be the same, Pocahontas wasn’t in 3D, therefore, they are, at least, slightly different.
Even before the existence of humans?
I already answered that. Btw, why didn’t you make Avatar before Cameron?
They never went to the patent office for Avatar. The state wasn’t involved at all.
Okay.
Are you saying that IP protects private property rights?
The idea of 3d movies has been around for decades. You are still bullshitting us.
I’ll settle this so you don’t continue to play innocent. You did not make Avatar because Avatar is a good, and like all goods in a world of scarcity it must be produced. Simply having the idea of a good does not bring it to reality. To produce a good takes skill labor and capital, and you have neither of those, which is why you do not constantly release blockbuster films. However, you do feel that you are entitled to having goods for free. That idea, like all other ideas, is worthless.