From what I understand, communism failed because you can't economically duplicate food, a car, or a TV in a cost effective manner. For those instances where you can make copies in a cost effective manner, communism appears pretty neat.
The Crimson Knights are essentially self-appointed guardians of order in the.hack fictional game 'The World'
Guess whoever moderated that off-topic, didn't know that and didn't... I don't know, but it has to be more than simply not knowing that reference.
What makes the representation different from the idea? Once a person sees it an idea is formed again. That being the case, is not the idea transferred?
Except that most people don't consider that the combination of medium and ideas are intellectual property just the ideas, or else it would be clear cut that the copy of data from someone else's medium once transferred to my medium would be my intellectual property. Taken alone, the way the sentence, "When that information is recorded, the medium used to contain the record is intellectul property." is structured, most would take it to mean that the medium and not the information is the IP, but based on the rest of your sentences, that does not appear to be what you are saying.
Changing the name of something doesn't change that something, but it signifies that you believe it to have properties that weren't previously identified in the previous term. For example "small animals" refers to cats, dogs, and ducks. Calling them cats, dogs, and ducks doesn't change the properties of them, but it recognizes that there is something different between those creatures. Calling them small plants also wouldn't change what they are, but people would get a different idea of what you were talking about if you were to say small plants. In the same fashion, intellectual property doesn't describe the true state of the material, and calling it that is as bad as calling small animals small plants.
I am not making the argument that intellectual property "doesn't exist" because it's not in tangible form. I am making the argument that intellectual property doesn't exist because its possession is not controlable. I am not demanding that others surrender the fruits of their labor with nothing in exchange, only that they request to be paid up front. To revisit the national park analogy, if the people running the park decide a hole needs to be dug, they hire someone to dig it.
Slashdot Mirror
So it's possible that the breach is not the cause of the crash?
The problem is, without copyright, individuals and organizations would be able to restrict distribution of derivitive works.
You pick and choose whatever examples help you win your argument and disregard those that don't quite fit your theory.
From what I understand, communism failed because you can't economically duplicate food, a car, or a TV in a cost effective manner. For those instances where you can make copies in a cost effective manner, communism appears pretty neat.
the An individual who illegally distributes music... part even though you copied it in your post.
How about Zoloft?
I thought that 802.11b kept each connection on completely separate frequencies.
The Crimson Knights are essentially self-appointed guardians of order in the .hack fictional game 'The World'
Guess whoever moderated that off-topic, didn't know that and didn't... I don't know, but it has to be more than simply not knowing that reference.
Crimson Knights
Go to a psychologist and ask them for medicine to treat Obsessive compulsive disorder.
Nah, that's not a problem at all, but then I AM an imperialist.
Yes it would.
In redshifting energy gets spread out over a greater space if i understand everything correctly.
That's what I thought, too. Could someone please explain why this isn't what Einstein's equations are saying?
Whoops didn't follow the rest of the discussion the first time around.
If an object has energy then it has mass. Just plug the energy into E=mc^2 and solve for m
What makes the representation different from the idea? Once a person sees it an idea is formed again. That being the case, is not the idea transferred?
Except that most people don't consider that the combination of medium and ideas are intellectual property just the ideas, or else it would be clear cut that the copy of data from someone else's medium once transferred to my medium would be my intellectual property. Taken alone, the way the sentence, "When that information is recorded, the medium used to contain the record is intellectul property." is structured, most would take it to mean that the medium and not the information is the IP, but based on the rest of your sentences, that does not appear to be what you are saying.
Changing the name of something doesn't change that something, but it signifies that you believe it to have properties that weren't previously identified in the previous term. For example "small animals" refers to cats, dogs, and ducks. Calling them cats, dogs, and ducks doesn't change the properties of them, but it recognizes that there is something different between those creatures. Calling them small plants also wouldn't change what they are, but people would get a different idea of what you were talking about if you were to say small plants. In the same fashion, intellectual property doesn't describe the true state of the material, and calling it that is as bad as calling small animals small plants.
I want a war. I believe someone will win.
Most proponents of ZPE and other such energy generators don't agree with the all systems tend towards maximum entropy part.
How is open source different? Also in times past artists had patrons that supported them.
I am not making the argument that intellectual property "doesn't exist" because it's not in tangible form. I am making the argument that intellectual property doesn't exist because its possession is not controlable. I am not demanding that others surrender the fruits of their labor with nothing in exchange, only that they request to be paid up front. To revisit the national park analogy, if the people running the park decide a hole needs to be dug, they hire someone to dig it.
Potentiall less progress in the arts, and less content generated, but the access to that content should be greater than currently.
That is correct.