This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism

[FreedomEqualsRiches]

But the entire process, from the word go, is IP.
Bitcoins are also IP, I should add.

Your point?

My point is that if I spend millions developing something, and, once developed, it is easily reverse-engineered and put into production, I am broke, unless some form of IP recognition exists.

Wouldn't that instead mean you do not pursue a drug which would cost millions to develop, if you weren't sure you could make your money back?  If enough people wanted it, couldn't a whole crowd of people fund the research?

Enough people want to cure cancer, and give a bit of cash to do so.  The drugs are still expensive, and pharma co's have difficulty recouping their R/D expenses.

[myrkul]

But the entire process, from the word go, is IP.
Bitcoins are also IP, I should add.

Your point?

My point is that if I spend millions developing something, and, once developed, it is easily reverse-engineered and put into production, I am broke, unless some form of IP recognition exists.

Wouldn't that instead mean you do not pursue a drug which would cost millions to develop, if you weren't sure you could make your money back?  If enough people wanted it, couldn't a whole crowd of people fund the research?

Enough people want to cure cancer, and give a bit of cash to do so.  The drugs are still expensive, and pharma co's have difficulty recouping their R/D expenses.

Now, is IP law helping that, or hindering it?

[kokjo]

Correct, I think it should be long enough to pay for R/D, implementation/production, marketing, plus a certain period of pure profit.

It is. If it is not, you're not charging enough for it during your monopoly period. Of course, that will increase the incentive to reverse-engineer and compete....

In the case of pharmaceuticals, and chip design, my monopoly period needs to be quite years long.  Some things take millions do develop, but once developed, take pennies reverse-engineer and produce.

funny! myrkul is killing people, by not giving incentives to people trying to save them.

Shouldn't you be busy planning acts of violence against Danish Cartoonists?

what? that dude who draw a funny pic of a prophet from a religion i don't believe in?
why would i do that? he makes funny stuff, i have no reason to harm him.

Please read this, so you know where we AnCaps are coming from, in a very basic sense.  Its a quick read.

http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf

The premise is that law is a commodity like any other, and a free market will provide better law than a central command/control structure that only makes a one-size-fits-all product.  Think of Lada v/s Porsche.

why the fuck would i want a car that some one would want to steal?

[FreedomEqualsRiches]

But the entire process, from the word go, is IP.
Bitcoins are also IP, I should add.

Your point?

My point is that if I spend millions developing something, and, once developed, it is easily reverse-engineered and put into production, I am broke, unless some form of IP recognition exists.

And my point is that it is not as easy as you seem to assume, and that law cannot, and should not, make up for a poor business model.

It is a very poor business model indeed that seeks to cure a small minority of the population.
Yes, I know, that's a cop-out.  How's this:  I'm a greedy entrepreneur, who wants some force to help ensure that I profit from my work?  And, I'm willing to pay for said force.

[FreedomEqualsRiches]

Correct, I think it should be long enough to pay for R/D, implementation/production, marketing, plus a certain period of pure profit.

It is. If it is not, you're not charging enough for it during your monopoly period. Of course, that will increase the incentive to reverse-engineer and compete....

In the case of pharmaceuticals, and chip design, my monopoly period needs to be quite years long.  Some things take millions do develop, but once developed, take pennies reverse-engineer and produce.

funny! myrkul is killing people, by not giving incentives to people trying to save them.

Shouldn't you be busy planning acts of violence against Danish Cartoonists?

what? that dude who draw a funny pic of a prophet from a religion i don't believe in?
why would i do that? he makes funny stuff, i have no reason to harm him.

Please read this, so you know where we AnCaps are coming from, in a very basic sense.  Its a quick read.

http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf

The premise is that law is a commodity like any other, and a free market will provide better law than a central command/control structure that only makes a one-size-fits-all product.  Think of Lada v/s Porsche.

why the fuck would i want a car that some one would want to steal?

Just read the .pdf, you cross-eyed Mary penguin.

[kokjo]

Correct, I think it should be long enough to pay for R/D, implementation/production, marketing, plus a certain period of pure profit.

It is. If it is not, you're not charging enough for it during your monopoly period. Of course, that will increase the incentive to reverse-engineer and compete....

In the case of pharmaceuticals, and chip design, my monopoly period needs to be quite years long.  Some things take millions do develop, but once developed, take pennies reverse-engineer and produce.

funny! myrkul is killing people, by not giving incentives to people trying to save them.

Shouldn't you be busy planning acts of violence against Danish Cartoonists?

what? that dude who draw a funny pic of a prophet from a religion i don't believe in?
why would i do that? he makes funny stuff, i have no reason to harm him.

Please read this, so you know where we AnCaps are coming from, in a very basic sense.  Its a quick read.

http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf

The premise is that law is a commodity like any other, and a free market will provide better law than a central command/control structure that only makes a one-size-fits-all product.  Think of Lada v/s Porsche.

why the fuck would i want a car that some one would want to steal?

Just read the .pdf, you cross-eyed Mary penguin.

no, thanks. i will not read your capitalistic propaganda, its a waste of my time.

[FreedomEqualsRiches]

Correct, I think it should be long enough to pay for R/D, implementation/production, marketing, plus a certain period of pure profit.

It is. If it is not, you're not charging enough for it during your monopoly period. Of course, that will increase the incentive to reverse-engineer and compete....

In the case of pharmaceuticals, and chip design, my monopoly period needs to be quite years long.  Some things take millions do develop, but once developed, take pennies reverse-engineer and produce.

funny! myrkul is killing people, by not giving incentives to people trying to save them.

Shouldn't you be busy planning acts of violence against Danish Cartoonists?

what? that dude who draw a funny pic of a prophet from a religion i don't believe in?
why would i do that? he makes funny stuff, i have no reason to harm him.

Please read this, so you know where we AnCaps are coming from, in a very basic sense.  Its a quick read.

http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf

The premise is that law is a commodity like any other, and a free market will provide better law than a central command/control structure that only makes a one-size-fits-all product.  Think of Lada v/s Porsche.

why the fuck would i want a car that some one would want to steal?

Just read the .pdf, you cross-eyed Mary penguin.

no, thanks. i will not read your capitalistic propaganda, its a waste of my time.

My mistake. Now eff off.

[FreedomEqualsRiches]

But the entire process, from the word go, is IP.
Bitcoins are also IP, I should add.

Your point?

My point is that if I spend millions developing something, and, once developed, it is easily reverse-engineered and put into production, I am broke, unless some form of IP recognition exists.

Wouldn't that instead mean you do not pursue a drug which would cost millions to develop, if you weren't sure you could make your money back?  If enough people wanted it, couldn't a whole crowd of people fund the research?

Enough people want to cure cancer, and give a bit of cash to do so.  The drugs are still expensive, and pharma co's have difficulty recouping their R/D expenses.

Now, is IP law helping that, or hindering it?

Probably both.  I did say that current IP law is broken.

[kokjo]

My mistake. Now eff off.

fuck off yourself.

[myrkul]

But the entire process, from the word go, is IP.
Bitcoins are also IP, I should add.

Your point?

My point is that if I spend millions developing something, and, once developed, it is easily reverse-engineered and put into production, I am broke, unless some form of IP recognition exists.

And my point is that it is not as easy as you seem to assume, and that law cannot, and should not, make up for a poor business model.

It is a very poor business model indeed that seeks to cure a small minority of the population.

Not at all. It is, however, a poor business model that seeks to cure a small minority of the population for cheap.

Capitalism 101: If you're not making enough profit to cover your expenses, charge more.

[FreedomEqualsRiches]

But the entire process, from the word go, is IP.
Bitcoins are also IP, I should add.

Your point?

My point is that if I spend millions developing something, and, once developed, it is easily reverse-engineered and put into production, I am broke, unless some form of IP recognition exists.

And my point is that it is not as easy as you seem to assume, and that law cannot, and should not, make up for a poor business model.

It is a very poor business model indeed that seeks to cure a small minority of the population.

Not at all. It is, however, a poor business model that seeks to cure a small minority of the population for cheap.

Capitalism 101: If you're not making enough profit to cover your expenses, charge more.

Capitalism 101: If someone steals my stuff, seek compensation. 
I guess it all boils down to "stuff".  My inventions are my stuff, at least for a while, and that while will be prolonged to ensure my profitability, to the best of my ability, and I will pay good money to see that happen, as it is a good investment.  Molon Labe.

[myrkul]

Capitalism 101: If someone steals my stuff, seek compensation. 
I guess it all boils down to "stuff".  My inventions are my stuff, at least for a while, and that while will be prolonged to ensure my profitability, to the best of my ability, and I will pay good money to see that happen, as it is a good investment.  Molon Labe.

Are you willing to use force to ensure your monopoly?

[Mike Christ]

IP's a fun subject.  Can anyone truly own the ingredients to a drug?  Sure; but can they own the rights to mix those ingredients together in a specific fashion?  Can we truly enforce a law that states Mary Jane owns the recipe to hash brownies, and anyone who makes them owes her some cash?  Possible, but not without the use of force...

[FreedomEqualsRiches]

Capitalism 101: If someone steals my stuff, seek compensation. 
I guess it all boils down to "stuff".  My inventions are my stuff, at least for a while, and that while will be prolonged to ensure my profitability, to the best of my ability, and I will pay good money to see that happen, as it is a good investment.  Molon Labe.

Are you willing to use force to ensure your monopoly?

Until I have recouped my investment, plus a good return, yes, I am, provided that it is agreed upon by an arbitration company.

[FreedomEqualsRiches]

IP's a fun subject.  Can anyone truly own the ingredients to a drug?  Sure; but can they own the rights to mix those ingredients together in a specific fashion?  Can we truly enforce a law that states Mary Jane owns the recipe to hash brownies, and anyone who makes them owes her some cash?  Possible, but not without the use of force...

Making drugs is a lot more than just mixing stuff.

[myrkul]

Capitalism 101: If someone steals my stuff, seek compensation. 
I guess it all boils down to "stuff".  My inventions are my stuff, at least for a while, and that while will be prolonged to ensure my profitability, to the best of my ability, and I will pay good money to see that happen, as it is a good investment.  Molon Labe.

Are you willing to use force to ensure your monopoly?

Until I have recouped my investment, plus a good return, yes, I am, provided that it is agreed upon by an arbitration company.

So you are going to claim ownership - rightful control - over a portion of another person's property, and enforce that claim by force of arms?

Doesn't sound very capitalist of you.

[kokjo]

IP's a fun subject.  Can anyone truly own the ingredients to a drug?  Sure; but can they own the rights to mix those ingredients together in a specific fashion?  Can we truly enforce a law that states Mary Jane owns the recipe to hash brownies, and anyone who makes them owes her some cash?  Possible, but not without the use of force...

Making drugs is a lot more than just mixing stuff.

not really, except maybe heating it and cooling it sometimes.

[Mike Christ]

I believe this is how patents were born

[FreedomEqualsRiches]

Capitalism 101: If someone steals my stuff, seek compensation. 
I guess it all boils down to "stuff".  My inventions are my stuff, at least for a while, and that while will be prolonged to ensure my profitability, to the best of my ability, and I will pay good money to see that happen, as it is a good investment.  Molon Labe.

Are you willing to use force to ensure your monopoly?

Until I have recouped my investment, plus a good return, yes, I am, provided that it is agreed upon by an arbitration company.

So you are going to claim ownership - rightful control - over a portion of another person's property, and enforce that claim by force of arms?

Doesn't sound very capitalist of you.

Very capitalist, just not very libertarian, I admit.  Funny, but my position gives advantage to the innovator, yours to the non-state capitalist, but my position does have the effect of infringing on people's property right, but your position runs a greater risk of monopolies.  I will have to think this over in greater detail.
I like to think that we (including Mike Christ and Rassah) are all on the same side.
I do dogmatically assume what is mine is mine, and that includes IP.

[myrkul]

I do dogmatically assume what is mine is mine, and that includes IP.

And I agree. Your ideas are your ideas. If you don't want to share that idea, keep it in your head, and only in your head.

As soon as that idea is in my head, it becomes my idea as well, to do with as I see fit, and neither of us can rightfully prevent the other from doing whatever he wants with that idea.

As Jefferson put it, "He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.”

I would also take exception with your assumption that removing IP restrictions runs a greater risk of monopolies. In some industries, there might develop natural monopolies, but the practical result would be to destroy the last vestiges of any actual monopolies.