Daily Anarchist Forum
December 14, 2018, 07:54:48 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the Daily Anarchist Forum!
 
   Home   Help Search Members Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
  Print  
Author Topic: Intellectual Property  (Read 16136 times)
JustSayNoToStatism
Daily Anarchist Crew
Hero Member
****
*****
Posts: 1747


View Profile
« on: February 11, 2012, 12:28:33 AM »

What is everyone's take on intellectual property? Break it down into copyright, patent, and trademark.
Logged

"I like to eat. Instead of a monarch I propose we have a Chef be final arbiter in matters. We'll call it anarcho-chefism."
-MAM
dpalme
Solder Monkey
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 798



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 11, 2012, 12:40:30 AM »

I can see why people fight for it, and I can understand people wanting patents and copywrites and all that junk, but I see those as fairly pointless piece of paper. Look at what happens with opensource hardware/software, and the whole creative commons world. People are still prosperous even when you can legally download and build your own stuff.
Logged

http://cur.lv/fgf0 <--- Accepting bitcoins!
DROI
Newbie
*
Posts: 30



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 11, 2012, 12:43:19 AM »

Intellectual property is a scam.
My main example being this: Let's say I own a pen and some unused paper. I ask those in favor of intellectual property if this pen and paper is mine and they'll probably agree. I write a copyrighted book onto the paper and sell it.
"THIEF!!!!"
"Wait, I thought you agreed that the pen and paper where mine?"
Logged
randallstevens
Full Member
***
Posts: 174


FREEDOM!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2012, 01:03:34 AM »

My take is that it's all garbage. Ideas are not limited like physical resources and therefore in need of rules governing ownership. Two people cannot use a piece of property such as a bicycle at the same time, so ownership must be established. Two people can sing the same song or read copies of the same book, so therefore no ownership is required. If you want an idea only for yourself, then don't tell anyone, don't get the guns of government involved.

Trademarks can be a little different, insofar as a company that is purposely imitating a product (Gucci purse) in order to defraud someone can be committing a crime, but I still think the market rather than government is a more efficient and moral source of justice to deal with force and fraud.
Logged

He doesn't exist, except on paper.
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2012, 06:01:51 AM »

I see them all as useless at this point.  I certainly understand the desire to protect IP, but those methods just don't do the trick anymore.  Alternative market methods must be used currently anyway if you want to protect IP.  Those government methods just add a layer of cost to protect yourself from other people that would claim your IP at this point. 
Logged

JustSayNoToStatism
Daily Anarchist Crew
Hero Member
****
*****
Posts: 1747


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2012, 12:32:41 PM »

Okay, so we all agree that government sucks, what a surprise.

But what about the concept of IP? Is it "legitimate" to have someone agree to a contract not to distribute something as a precondition of buying your product?

If people develop free market solutions to protecting the code of their programs, are you on board with that? I know Seth likes FOSS. But do you have something against software that doesn't fall into this category? How could programmers and software engineers make a living if everything was FOSS? (Yes, this last question sounds like the statist "how would such and such work" but look past it). I know free doesn't mean "having a price of zero," but once it's FOSS it's so easy to copy that it might as well cost nothing to the users.

I don't know.

I don't download movies or music, because I see the uploaders as having violated a contract with the artists (not that they probably bought it themselves, but somewhere along the line it happened).
Logged

"I like to eat. Instead of a monarch I propose we have a Chef be final arbiter in matters. We'll call it anarcho-chefism."
-MAM
derick
Full Member
***
Posts: 160


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2012, 01:52:42 PM »

IP requires state force, whithout force theres no IP.
Logged
JustSayNoToStatism
Daily Anarchist Crew
Hero Member
****
*****
Posts: 1747


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 11, 2012, 01:58:15 PM »

IP requires state force, whithout force theres no IP.
Are you sure? There's no way to hide your source code and effectively make it your property? There never will be?
Logged

"I like to eat. Instead of a monarch I propose we have a Chef be final arbiter in matters. We'll call it anarcho-chefism."
-MAM
derick
Full Member
***
Posts: 160


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 11, 2012, 02:38:51 PM »

IP requires state force, whithout force theres no IP.
Are you sure? There's no way to hide your source code and effectively make it your property? There never will be?

Honestly, no Im not sure but if I put an idea out in the public domain, I may be credited with the idea but I shouldnt be able to monopolize my idea in order to profit from it. Right?
Logged
Rothbardian
Radical Libertarian
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 272


Abolish the State!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 11, 2012, 03:40:33 PM »

But what about the concept of IP? Is it "legitimate" to have someone agree to a contract not to distribute something as a precondition of buying your product?
Yes, absolutely. That's why the proper stance is to agree with copyrights (though not always as they are designed in our statist society) and scorn patents. Grin
Logged

JustSayNoToStatism
Daily Anarchist Crew
Hero Member
****
*****
Posts: 1747


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 11, 2012, 04:25:37 PM »

IP requires state force, whithout force theres no IP.
Are you sure? There's no way to hide your source code and effectively make it your property? There never will be?

Honestly, no Im not sure but if I put an idea out in the public domain, I may be credited with the idea but I shouldnt be able to monopolize my idea in order to profit from it. Right?
It depends how you monopolize it, imo.
Logged

"I like to eat. Instead of a monarch I propose we have a Chef be final arbiter in matters. We'll call it anarcho-chefism."
-MAM
derick
Full Member
***
Posts: 160


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: February 11, 2012, 04:50:10 PM »

IP requires state force, whithout force theres no IP.
Are you sure? There's no way to hide your source code and effectively make it your property? There never will be?

Honestly, no Im not sure but if I put an idea out in the public domain, I may be credited with the idea but I shouldnt be able to monopolize my idea in order to profit from it. Right?
It depends how you monopolize it, imo.
It is my understanding that only the state can create a true monopoly. I dont understand how I could create a monopoly, in a free market, that is.
Logged
JustSayNoToStatism
Daily Anarchist Crew
Hero Member
****
*****
Posts: 1747


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: February 11, 2012, 05:17:40 PM »

IP requires state force, whithout force theres no IP.
Are you sure? There's no way to hide your source code and effectively make it your property? There never will be?

Honestly, no Im not sure but if I put an idea out in the public domain, I may be credited with the idea but I shouldnt be able to monopolize my idea in order to profit from it. Right?
It depends how you monopolize it, imo.
It is my understanding that only the state can create a true monopoly. I dont understand how I could create a monopoly, in a free market, that is.
Monopolies aren't sustainable in free markets. They can exist though. Say someone is the first person develop a particular type of useful software. That person is a monopolist, and if he prevents others from viewing the code, might remain without competitors for a while. Other people could buy it and use it and try to understand it from that, or figure out another way to do the same thing, but the person who makes something first has an advantage that they can exploit. Being able to operate for just a short period of time with no competitors can make a project profitable. If all software was instantly available freely to everyone, smart people aren't going to get into software, because there's no money in it.

I see nothing wrong with *not* sharing your sourcecode. For example, developing methods to prevent people from duplicating your product, CD-keys, other things like that.
Logged

"I like to eat. Instead of a monarch I propose we have a Chef be final arbiter in matters. We'll call it anarcho-chefism."
-MAM
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: February 12, 2012, 12:45:35 PM »

An interesting thing about government model on IP is that it is somewhere between the free market solution, and anti-IP.  By not pleasing anyone, everyone hates it, but it provides aspects of each.  

Many people in the free market would of course try to protect everything forever with contracts and security measures, some would give it away, but it wouldn't be mandatory.  I don't see people demanding open access to the trade secret of the coca-cola formula.  The anti-IP advocates would see contracts be invalid because they either don't like them saying it isn't harming anyone or see it as a greater good concern.  Anti-IP seems anti-free market to me.  

Now if you independently develop something that already exists, obviously in a free market you wouldn't be bound to the contract, but with the government version you are.  That is the government versions biggest downfall in my opinion.  
« Last Edit: February 12, 2012, 12:56:40 PM by Syock » Logged

Dagnytg
Newbie
*
Posts: 17


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: February 12, 2012, 11:37:20 PM »


But what about the concept of IP? Is it "legitimate" to have someone agree to a contract not to distribute something as a precondition of buying your product?


I understand the use of contractual agreements when someone is renting or leasing. This stipulates that you are not the owner.  You’re borrowing and using property on a temporary basis (until the lease or rent is up).

When I buy books, music, software, or an apple, orange, hammer and nail, upon purchase I attain ownership of them.  I can choose to do with them as I please.  Interesting how the use of the apple, orange, hammer and nail seem to follow that basic premise.  Why books, music, and software do not…is a contradiction.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!