Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 11:16:37 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 [113] 114 115 116 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Intellectual Property - In All Fairness!  (Read 96103 times)
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 11, 2011, 02:42:55 PM
 #2241

Copyright infringement is not larceny. Whether the medium is paper, electronic code or something else, it was your property to begin with. You have only modified it to your whim. It belongs to nobody but yourself. To claim that these mediums can become somebody elses by merely the alteration of its shape is the greatest theft of all.

That's your opinion.  You are entitled to it.  But those of us who like living in societies where innovation makes us rich compared to the rest of the world are entitled to disagree.

1481368597
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481368597

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481368597
Reply with quote  #2

1481368597
Report to moderator
1481368597
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481368597

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481368597
Reply with quote  #2

1481368597
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481368597
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481368597

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481368597
Reply with quote  #2

1481368597
Report to moderator
1481368597
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481368597

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481368597
Reply with quote  #2

1481368597
Report to moderator
ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 02:43:52 PM
 #2242

Copyright infringement is not larceny. Whether the medium is paper, electronic code or something else, it was your property to begin with. You have only modified it to your whim. It belongs to nobody but yourself. To claim that these mediums can become somebody elses by merely the alteration of its shape is the greatest theft of all.

That's your opinion.  You are entitled to it.  But those of us who like living in societies where innovation makes us rich compared to the rest of the world are entitled to disagree.

It's not my opinion. It's my property right and I'm entitled to it. If you want it, you'll have to spill my blood.
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 11, 2011, 02:53:27 PM
 #2243

Copyright infringement is not larceny. Whether the medium is paper, electronic code or something else, it was your property to begin with. You have only modified it to your whim. It belongs to nobody but yourself. To claim that these mediums can become somebody elses by merely the alteration of its shape is the greatest theft of all.

That's your opinion.  You are entitled to it.  But those of us who like living in societies where innovation makes us rich compared to the rest of the world are entitled to disagree.

It's not my opinion. It's my property right and I'm entitled to it. If you want it, you'll have to spill my blood.

If you decide that stealing someone else's work and selling it for your own profit is what you want as a career, its far more likely that you'll simply be sued for the undeserved earnings.  If you decide to inflict violence on the law enforcement staff, that would be very sad.

ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 02:55:44 PM
 #2244

Copyright infringement is not larceny. Whether the medium is paper, electronic code or something else, it was your property to begin with. You have only modified it to your whim. It belongs to nobody but yourself. To claim that these mediums can become somebody elses by merely the alteration of its shape is the greatest theft of all.

That's your opinion.  You are entitled to it.  But those of us who like living in societies where innovation makes us rich compared to the rest of the world are entitled to disagree.

It's not my opinion. It's my property right and I'm entitled to it. If you want it, you'll have to spill my blood.

If you decide that stealing someone else's work and selling it for your own profit is what you want as a career, its far more likely that you'll simply be sued for the undeserved earnings.  If you decide to inflict violence on the law enforcement staff, that would be very sad.

I won't be initiating violence.
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 11, 2011, 03:01:03 PM
 #2245

...snip...

I won't be initiating violence.

I know - at heart you are a good guy.  I doubt copying a patented drug design and selling it without a license is your thing either.  The is plenty money to be made from actually creating your own stuff without leeching off other people's stuff.

ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 03:09:49 PM
 #2246

I won't have any qualms about replicating a patented life-saving drug and selling it to the poor for a price they can afford.
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 11, 2011, 03:36:48 PM
 #2247

I won't have any qualms about replicating a patented life-saving drug and selling it to the poor for a price they can afford.

I'm sure the people whose IP you are profiting from won't have any qualms about suing you for any money you make.  Provided you don't hurt anyone and don't mind the inconvenience of having your assets seized, no-one will have any qualms.

Of course if you decide to use violence on the poor law enforcement people, that would be different but you have said you won't Smiley

chickenado
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 172


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 04:34:18 PM
 #2248

Quote from: Hawker link=topic=38854.msg614727#msg614727
Logic fail.  Stealing apples is not the same as stealing oranges but both are bad things.  Same with stealing any other property.  

apples are not composed of oranges and oranges are not composed of apples.  

apples can exist in the absence of oranges and vice versa.

They are independent.


Physical matter and information are NOT independent.  information cannot exist in the absence of physical matter. information cannot be created or modified without modifying physical matter.

So your analogy is invalid.



Do I need to spell it out?

Physical property = Right to exclude others from controlling a finite, delimited amount of matter.

IP = Right to control ALL physical matter in the universe in a finite, delimited amount of manners.

See how the two rights cannot hold at the same time?

FredericBastiat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 04:44:53 PM
 #2249

Do I need to spell it out?

Physical property = Right to exclude others from controlling a finite, delimited amount of matter.

IP = Right to control ALL physical matter in the universe in a finite, delimited amount of manners.

See how the two rights cannot hold at the same time?

Would you vet the following for me? I'm curious about your opinion on the matter.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38854.msg485594#msg485594

http://payb.tc/evo or
1F7venVKJa5CLw6qehjARkXBS55DU5YT59
chickenado
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 172


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 05:48:48 PM
 #2250

Do I need to spell it out?

Physical property = Right to exclude others from controlling a finite, delimited amount of matter.

IP = Right to control ALL physical matter in the universe in a finite, delimited amount of manners.

See how the two rights cannot hold at the same time?

Would you vet the following for me? I'm curious about your opinion on the matter.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38854.msg485594#msg485594

A reductionist approach to political philosophy if i have ever seen one!
It might be too reductionist. I think that property rights do exhibit irreducible complexity sometimes.


I don't agree with 5). That would imply that a vacuum is ownerless, in which case you could homestead the inside of someones vacuum chamber. Space must be part of the definition. But which space? Einstein tells us that all inertial frames are relative. There has to be a third component: scarcity of properties.

Real life example: sattelite slots in geostationary orbit are traded like real estate.
FredericBastiat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 06:24:12 PM
 #2251

A reductionist approach to political philosophy if i have ever seen one!
It might be too reductionist. I think that property rights do exhibit irreducible complexity sometimes.

I don't agree with 5). That would imply that a vacuum is ownerless, in which case you could homestead the inside of someones vacuum chamber. Space must be part of the definition. But which space? Einstein tells us that all inertial frames are relative. There has to be a third component: scarcity of properties.

Real life example: sattelite slots in geostationary orbit are traded like real estate.

If you have any examples of irreducible property issues, I'd be interested in hearing them. The definition of 5) is further modified by 6.2) and 6.3) which would include the "space", or less dense PMM, embordered by more dense PMM. I'd say there is no such thing as a vacuum, just less dense PMM, which if controlled in some reasonably exclusive manner, would make it yours. Density is a non issue I think.

Your example of satellite orbits should be explained by 6.1. Which is to say, you could attempt to claim the entire universe (or orbital paths), but by mere proclamation that wouldn't necessarily make it property. If you can't physically occupy it yet, or you haven't occupied it yet, you haven't homesteaded it, so it's up for grabs by somebody clever enough to figure out the physical problem of acquiring it.

To wit, if the satellite orbit had never been occupied before, your attempt at trading/exchanging it would be a partial farce, or at least not logically enforceable in a court of law, because you haven't occupied that "space" yet to make it yours. That's not to say you couldn't trade that space with anybody else in any legally contractual way, just that if you didn't occupy it first and somebody else did, I don't think you have a case (or a leg) to stand on.

I've always felt some squeamishness when it came to homesteading and property abandonment definitions. I'd like to hear some competing opinions on the matter if you've got the stomach for it.

http://payb.tc/evo or
1F7venVKJa5CLw6qehjARkXBS55DU5YT59
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 11, 2011, 06:34:13 PM
 #2252

Quote from: Hawker link=topic=38854.msg614727#msg614727
Logic fail.  Stealing apples is not the same as stealing oranges but both are bad things.  Same with stealing any other property.  

apples are not composed of oranges and oranges are not composed of apples.  

apples can exist in the absence of oranges and vice versa.

They are independent.


Physical matter and information are NOT independent.  information cannot exist in the absence of physical matter. information cannot be created or modified without modifying physical matter.

So your analogy is invalid.



Do I need to spell it out?

Physical property = Right to exclude others from controlling a finite, delimited amount of matter.

IP = Right to control ALL physical matter in the universe in a finite, delimited amount of manners.

See how the two rights cannot hold at the same time?


Sorry - still wrong in logic.  I can sue someone who takes my car and I can sue someone who resells my software.  Being able to protect my IP does not prevent me protecting my car. It simply means that if you want to sell products like mine, hire some staff and write your own.  

Still baffled as to how you can say that the alternative, where you wait for someone else to hire staff and create a product, then take their work and sell it for your profit, is not aggression.  

ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 06:35:43 PM
 #2253

www.everythingisaremix.info

It's not aggression because nothing scarce was stolen. Ideas are not original.
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 11, 2011, 06:38:38 PM
 #2254

www.everythingisaremix.info

It's not aggression because nothing scarce was stolen. Ideas are not original.

That's fine if you are happy that all medical research and technical innovations that can be found have been found.  Most people will not agree with you and want to encourage development of new drugs and other things that might improve life.

ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 06:40:05 PM
 #2255

www.everythingisaremix.info

It's not aggression because nothing scarce was stolen. Ideas are not original.

That's fine if you are happy that all medical research and technical innovations that can be found have been found.  Most people will not agree with you and want to encourage development of new drugs and other things that might improve life.
Strawman. I never argued that. What I did argue was ideas are only based on previous ones. They are public territory.
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 11, 2011, 06:43:30 PM
 #2256

www.everythingisaremix.info

It's not aggression because nothing scarce was stolen. Ideas are not original.

That's fine if you are happy that all medical research and technical innovations that can be found have been found.  Most people will not agree with you and want to encourage development of new drugs and other things that might improve life.
Strawman. I never argued that. What I did argue was ideas are only based on previous ones. They are public territory.

Um - not a strawman.  Inventions take investment.  Drugs costs hundreds of millions to develop.  If you remove the protection of the patent system, research stops as there is no way to pay for it.

Take responsibility for the consequences of your argument.

ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 06:45:25 PM
 #2257

www.everythingisaremix.info

It's not aggression because nothing scarce was stolen. Ideas are not original.

That's fine if you are happy that all medical research and technical innovations that can be found have been found.  Most people will not agree with you and want to encourage development of new drugs and other things that might improve life.
Strawman. I never argued that. What I did argue was ideas are only based on previous ones. They are public territory.

Inventions take investment.  Drugs costs hundreds of millions to develop.  If you remove the protection of the patent system, research stops as there is no way to pay for it.

Strawman. That's not what we are talking about.
ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 06:48:43 PM
 #2258

Straw man arguments often arise in public debates such as a (hypothetical) prohibition debate:

    Person A: We should liberalize the laws on beer.
    Person B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.

The proposal was to relax laws on beer. Person B has exaggerated this to a position harder to defend, i.e., "unrestricted access to intoxicants".[1] It is a logical fallacy because Person A never made that claim. This example is also a slippery slope fallacy.

Another example:

    Person A: Our society should be taxed less.
    Person B: It is unjust to promote a society that neglects the poor.

In this case, Person B has transformed Person A's position from "less taxation" to "neglecting the poor", which is easier for Person B to defeat.


- Wikipedia
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 11, 2011, 07:22:57 PM
 #2259

...snip...
Inventions take investment.  Drugs costs hundreds of millions to develop.  If you remove the protection of the patent system, research stops as there is no way to pay for it.

Strawman. That's not what we are talking about.

ALPHA - we are talking about why IP laws are a good idea.  The preference for encouraging research is one reason.  Wittering on about straw men doesn't advance your case.

ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 11, 2011, 07:31:11 PM
 #2260

...snip...
Inventions take investment.  Drugs costs hundreds of millions to develop.  If you remove the protection of the patent system, research stops as there is no way to pay for it.

Strawman. That's not what we are talking about.

ALPHA - we are talking about why IP laws are a good idea.  The preference for encouraging research is one reason.  Wittering on about straw men doesn't advance your case.

Okay, so riddle me this: How has most of human civilization advanced without idea protection? Why was the Industrial Revolution so successful with all the captains of industry "stealing" from each other?
Pages: « 1 ... 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 [113] 114 115 116 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!