0
5

[–] RowdyBusch 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

I believe IP does not or should not exist. You cannot "steal" and idea (the intangible), only replicate it.

0
2

[–] JohnnyHenry 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Here's a good debate Jeffery Tucker hosted on the topic: The Great IP Debate | Alexander Baker vs Stephan Kinsella

My thought is that patents are illegitimate as they restrict the use of ideas/processes, which can be manifested in a infinite number of ways. However copyright is a different story since it restricts the distribution of finished goods (music/film/computer programs), which are transmitted in very few, or even a singular number of ways.

In the video, Baker argues that the creative creation process is analogous to the homesteading process. For example, a musician uses labor to transform raw materials (chords, lyrics, melodies) into a finished product (a recorded song). This gives him ownership of the song, similar to how a farmer plowing and sowing unclaimed land would give him ownership of the land.

0
2

[–] PaisaHunter [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I think we're on the right track when it comes to parents.

Concerning copyrights, what about a copy of the finished good? A superior product can beat out all replications as long as the seller can innovate and manage risk.

Are we really going to allow an entity to enforce a violent seizure when we have the consumer to say which is the superior product?

0
2

[–] JohnnyHenry 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I agree that enforcement can be problematic, especially in a statist context. In a practical sense the onus has to be on the content creator to prevent reproduction, rather than on an agency to deter others from reproducing.

But the real question is whether the creation process infers any ownership rights to the creator. Or, once a work is created, is it public domain free to be reproduced, repackaged, and sold in any manner? It's hard for me to reconcile that something as labor intensive as a movie or software program would become public domain just because it's form can be reduced to a copyable series of ones and zeros. Wouldn't a terms of service create a contractual basis for protecting ownership rights?