An argument against IP

Kytro · 05-31-2007, 12:34 AM

I am opposed to IP in nearly every form.

There are two reasons why I oppose IP:

1) It is in opposition to free trade, and I believe that trade should for the most part be free.

2) Almost all IP is based on the work of others, or the ideas of others - that is the nature of ideas and human knowledge in general. I am opposed to limiting human potential for commercial reasons.

I think the IP laws cause more harm than good.

Dumpy Dooby · 05-31-2007, 03:54 AM

I don't think I've seen someone hate the Internet Protocol so much.

To be more serious, though, I completely agree with you. I think IP laws are completely relative, and therefore do not belong in criminal law. There is nothing regarding IP that I could possibly do that would violate your rights. If I copy your method for making a grilled cheese sandwich, I have not infringed on any of your rights.

IP

Diesel66 · 05-31-2007, 05:12 AM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

\If I copy your method for making a grilled cheese sandwich, I have not infringed on any of your rights.

IP

Except the other guy spent years doing R&D to prefect it and you come around and steal his work. Without copyrights and patents, there would be no successful free market. Why risk all that time and energy when you know someone will sell an exact copy of your work

Phantom · 05-31-2007, 09:18 AM

The best argument I can think of in favor of IP protection is disclosure. (my understanding of this stuff is weak, so correct me if I mistate anything)

When someone files a patent in the US, that knowledge becomes public knowledge that anyone can build upon. If we eliminate that protection, persons will take actions to prevent the spread of knowledge and therefore inhibit progress.

What would we do about this problem if we eliminate IP protection?

Stylerod · 05-31-2007, 09:58 AM

Scrum · 05-31-2007, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

IP?

Intellectual property.

This is a really tough area. I can see both sides of the debate.

Dumpy Dooby · 05-31-2007, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Except the other guy spent years doing R&D to prefect it and you come around and steal his work.

That's a sensationalist approach. Obviously I wouldn't consider it "stealing." I don't think it's stealing if he's not losing anything.

Without copyrights and patents, there would be no successful free market.

THE WHOLE MARKET WOULD COLLAPSE!!1

Removing copyrights and patents encourages people to outdo their competition. It drives competition. Why do you think a commune country like China is booming with technology so fast? The IP-based Chinese companies are growing much faster than their American counterparts. Here's an example. Again, this is a commune society. This is the antithesis of capitalism. And they're beating the shit out of our companies in terms of growth.

So much for copyrights and patents ensuring success of a free market, eh?

Why risk all that time and energy when you know someone will sell an exact copy of your work

Things work out better for everyone when the information is shared.

motivez · 05-31-2007, 01:54 PM

Obviously I wouldn't consider it "stealing." I don't think it's stealing if he's not losing anything.

He'd be losing return on his years of investment into research, etc, if every Tom, Dick, and Harry could come along and sell a copy of his product using the methods he had spent years perfecting..

Diesel66 · 05-31-2007, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

That's a sensationalist approach. Obviously I wouldn't consider it "stealing." I don't think it's stealing if he's not losing anything.

And I didnt consider it stealing because the company was big enough to absorb the costs. Rationalizing it doesnt change anything.

THE WHOLE MARKET WOULD COLLAPSE!!1

Removing copyrights and patents encourages people to outdo their competition. It drives competition. Why do you think a commune country like China is booming with technology so fast?

by stealing US, Japan and Europe technology.

Stylerod · 05-31-2007, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

He'd be losing return on his years of investment into research, etc, if every Tom, Dick, and Harry could come along and sell a copy of his product using the methods he had spent years perfecting..

Yeah. This seems simple enough. I must be missing something in this thread.

redwards · 05-31-2007, 02:43 PM

thomez · 05-31-2007, 03:27 PM

Patent protection seems important to me, though I'm not sure about IP.

Kytro · 05-31-2007, 06:05 PM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Except the other guy spent years doing R&D to prefect it and you come around and steal his work. Without copyrights and patents, there would be no successful free market.

Completely false. Free markets existed well before IP law did.

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Why risk all that time and energy when you know someone will sell an exact copy of your work

Someone always will. Invention is not confined to after IP was invented.

Dumpy Dooby · 05-31-2007, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

And I didnt consider it stealing because the company was big enough to absorb the costs. Rationalizing it doesnt change anything.

It has absolutely NOTHING to do with rationalization. I approach legislation objectively, and from a libertarian angle.

None of his inherent rights are being violated by me copying his work, even if I copy it verbatim.

by stealing US, Japan and Europe technology.

US, Japan, and Europe only got to where they are because of Chinese technology. Your argument is weak.

Kytro · 05-31-2007, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

He'd be losing return on his years of investment into research, etc, if every Tom, Dick, and Harry could come along and sell a copy of his product using the methods he had spent years perfecting..

I don't think that coming up with an idea entitles you to any protection. Your idea is always going to be based on the work of others.

If you don't want others to take your idea, then don't tell anyone about it. IP just restricts innovation and does not encourage it.

Patents & copyright are primarily used to lock up ideas and information and dole them out at an inflated value.

IP law inflates free market value.

Diesel66 · 05-31-2007, 08:31 PM

So Dumpy, explain why you think IP, copyrights, patents aren't a major part of a successful free market economy.

Especially when the entire world of economists disagrees with you.

redwards · 05-31-2007, 09:11 PM

I tend to agree that the idea of a patent is important. In any industry where one can deconstruct a product to figure out how to build their own (which is probably most industries), patents are the only thing which make research worthwhile.

I also agree that a limitation on patent protection is important, so that the rest of world can benefit from great innovation after the innovator has benefited.

thatguyoverthere · 05-31-2007, 09:13 PM

Originally Posted by Kytro

I don't think that coming up with an idea entitles you to any protection. Your idea is always going to be based on the work of others.

If you don't want others to take your idea, then don't tell anyone about it. IP just restricts innovation and does not encourage it.

Patents & copyright are primarily used to lock up ideas and information and dole them out at an inflated value.

IP law inflates free market value.

If I made a movie, why wouldn't I want people to pay me to see it? If I invented the Rubik's Cube, why wouldn't I want to get paid for my innovative idea? If I wrote the White Album, why shouldn't I make the maximum amount of money due me? Why should others make money off my idea?

Why should others be able to take the product of my labor? For the common good? I guess so, that's how we justify taxes, I suppose. But, taxes are taking a portion of one's income, and redistributing it (hopefully) for society's benefit. IP violations are the taking 100% of someone's ideas and intellectual labor, with no return to the creator.

Are you saying that intellectual property is not property, therefore theft of intellectual property is not theft?

Dumpy Dooby · 05-31-2007, 09:17 PM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

So Dumpy, explain why you think IP, copyrights, patents aren't a major part of a successful free market economy.

I already explained that.

Kytro · 05-31-2007, 09:18 PM

Originally Posted by redwards

I tend to agree that the idea of a patent is important. In any industry where one can deconstruct a product to figure out how to build their own (which is probably most industries), patents are the only thing which make research worthwhile.

I'm not sure I can agree, but then again I believe there are many motives for research - something I think should be funded by nations in any case.