Slashdot Mirror
Is IP Property?
An anonymous reader writes "In a recent article, Stanford Law Professor Mark Lemley argues that intellectual property is not 'property' in the traditional sense. According to Lemley, while 'free riding' off of someone else's land or other physical property rights is always undesirable, freely benefitting from someone else's intellectual property rights is often the best way to form a free and creative society. Lemley's distinction also points to the unusual fact that in IP, traditional liberals are often calling for less and less government, while conservatives demand regulation in order to protect their exclusive right to use their intellectual creations."
If you can't put a fence around it or put chains on it, like the air that we breathe, it belongs to nobody and everybody. The only reason that there are IP laws is because we have an economic system based on slavery (labor).
The system should be based on property not labor. The land (earth) has been around for billions of years. It does not belong to anyone in particular. It should be divided among families for an inheritance. It should not be divided for a price. It should be an inheritance for our children and their children.
What will we do when robots and AI replace everybody, i.e., when human labor and expertise becomes worthless? Neither capitalism nor communism will do since they are both based on labor. Always demand liberty, nothing less.
As a small business owner and the inventor of several patents, I can say without doubt that strong patent law HAS favored my 3 person company and protected us from the large companies. It has given us greater credibility and a very nice leverage into negotiations for potential licensing. SO I ask, do you have yet to have any hands on experience with new ideas (you quote is a simple parroting the DNC, patenting said new concepts, or any experience with running a small company?
The incessant whining, wheedling, and haranguing by open source fanatics - a bunch of gang banging dog pilers, if you ask me - has driven me to it.
You are the one who sounds like a "fucking parasite". You want to use other people's work and creativity without paying for it or acknowledging it.
I am a strong copyright proponent, it's patents, usage of the doublespeak phrase "intellectual property" and the restriction of ideas that I find distasteful. Sorry to piss on your parade but I own more store purchased CD's and books than anybody else I know, so bring an umbrella next time.
I think you mean the composition and/or lyrics are automatically copyrighted when they are created. That would be because copyright is a right automatically granted to an author. If you don't know that, which you seemingly do not, why are you trying to correct me?