[ExI] intellectual property again

[Dan]

Well, what stops one from just putting stuff out there without intellectual property (IP) protection now -- save for the threat that someone might bring up an IP case against one?

Also, how does one judge "original" here? It seems to me this would always be arbitrary and there are enough IP cases around where it's not an instance of, say, a photocopy or a high quality recording, but of something that looks or sounds similar to something else. Well, the problem is, everything is, in some way, similar to (and different from) everything else. Unless one is going to bite the bullet and allow any difference at all to qualify -- in which case, someone's photocopy of Stephen King's latest novel or someone's bad camcorder recording of the remake of "The Crazies" is going to be a totally different work -- one is going to have really fuzzy boundaries -- and, unlike many other areas of life, these boundaries will cost people in terms of time, money, and maybe even prison time.

One problem for IP is while it is literally impossible for two people to dispose of the same physical property in the same way at the same time, this is not so with IP. For instance, let's say I find a hunk a gold on Mars and put it in my pocket -- and let's say everyone agrees it's mine. Fine. You can't really have the same hunk of gold in your pocket at the same time in the same way. But let's say, instead, I come up with a new way of finding hunks of gold -- maybe some new search process. There's no way that this prevents you or anyone else from coming up with the same. Nor does my having the process in my head prevent you from having it in yours. This seems a way IP it radically unlike physical property -- and calls into question treating it like other property.

(And I think the exclusivity problem is the or a major reason for property rights in the first place: once something can only be exclusively used, then issues of conflict over its use arise and these lead (inexorably?) to rights theory.)

I don't know about cash or its absence being the issue. That's kind of like blaming rape on people not wanting to give sex on demand. The problem, rather, is an inappropriate use of the property concept.

Regards,

Dan


From: "ablainey at aol.com" <ablainey at aol.com>
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Sent: Wed, March 3, 2010 2:16:49 PM
Subject: Re: [ExI] intellectual property again

OK, I will chime in for the Free side (I may change without warning or explanation).
As someone that creates original Art, Music, Scientific theories, Writings, Inventions, Software and a few other things that could fall under I.P.
I have found that the whole protection system stifles my creativity and offers nothing but distraction and concern. 
I have unreleased albums, unfinished books, unpublished theories, books and unrealised inventions cluttering my shelves. When they should be out in the world making it a better place.

My own personal view is that the protection system is not the source of the problem. Reward is the real issue and this always comes down to cold hard cash.
The sooner we do away with the stuff, the quicker we can get to creation for altruism and social merit.


How many world changing inventions are locked away out of fear that the idea will be stolen or un rewarded?

A

-----Original Message-----
From: spike <spike66 at att.net>
To: 'ExI chat list' <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 17:07
Subject: [ExI] intellectual property again

I will start it: I now think that society is justified in providing a legal means of protecting information as property; in most cases current intellectual property law is adequate and not overly restrictive.  I recognize there are absurdities with protocol patenting, but I don't see a

better way.



Your turn. 



spike


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100303/c9bed92c/attachment.html>