Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

harmful.cat-v.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 132 posts

Re: The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

#61

Post by adsr »

Helianthus wrote: post #59
adsr wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a strawman argument, since there are two components here. First, it's hard to make a living as a writer, perhaps your just not good enough or only appeal to a small part of the population. Secondly your right to get paid for your work. The second part doesn't go away simply because making a living as a writer is hard.

Yes, it does in fact. It isn't society's responsibility to make writing profitable. Just because the internet et al are making it harder to make a living as a writer doesn't mean we have any responsibility to turn around and make it easier.

It's society's responsibility to enforce the laws, this isn't a discussion about internet per se, it's not excluded from the laws of the society. Other phenomenons are also thriving on the internet like credit card frauds. By your logic this isn't society's responsibility either, we simply have to accept the current state and adapt.

Re: The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

#62

Post by FrojoS »

olavk wrote: post #43

Intellectual property at least makes a certain sense, since it is something you create yourself out of thin air, and therefore can decide to make available to others under certain conditions if both parties agree. If you don't make it available, nobody suffers, and if you do, you have created value without depriving others, so it is only fair to receive compensation. Owning land, on the other hand is clearly immoral.…

you have created value without depriving others, so it is only fair to receive compensation.

How is this fair to everyone else who had the same idea but wasn't as fast or greedy?

Re: The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

#63

Post by ignifero »

Helianthus wrote: post #59
adsr wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a strawman argument, since there are two components here. First, it's hard to make a living as a writer, perhaps your just not good enough or only appeal to a small part of the population. Secondly your right to get paid for your work. The second part doesn't go away simply because making a living as a writer is hard.

Yes, it does in fact. It isn't society's responsibility to make writing profitable. Just because the internet et al are making it harder to make a living as a writer doesn't mean we have any responsibility to turn around and make it easier.

  It isn't society's responsibility to make writing profitable.
Society rewards everything that benefits itself (at least the society i have agreed to live into). For example it rewards good scientific research because it makes everyone more productive and happier. I believe it has a good reason to make it profitable for writers to write good books too.

Re: The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

#64

Post by nextparadigms »

adsr wrote: post #61
Helianthus wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it does in fact. It isn't society's responsibility to make writing profitable. Just because the internet et al are making it harder to make a living as a writer doesn't mean we have any responsibility to turn around and make it easier.

It's society's responsibility to enforce the laws, this isn't a discussion about internet per se, it's not excluded from the laws of the society. Other phenomenons are also thriving on the internet like credit card frauds. By your logic this isn't society's responsibility either, we simply have to accept the current state and adapt.

Even if the laws are wrong? And even more "bad" laws are being introduced?

Re: The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

#65

Post by icebraining »

adsr wrote: post #61
Helianthus wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it does in fact. It isn't society's responsibility to make writing profitable. Just because the internet et al are making it harder to make a living as a writer doesn't mean we have any responsibility to turn around and make it easier.

It's society's responsibility to enforce the laws, this isn't a discussion about internet per se, it's not excluded from the laws of the society. Other phenomenons are also thriving on the internet like credit card frauds. By your logic this isn't society's responsibility either, we simply have to accept the current state and adapt.

The point is whether such laws should exist or not, not if they should be enforced.

The fact that without such laws some activities are unprofitable is not a reason to keep those laws, unless you think we should ban email to avoid layoffs of post office worker. Or ban Netflix to avoid losing jobs in video rentals.

Re: The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

#66

Post by adsr »

nextparadigms wrote: post #64
adsr wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's society's responsibility to enforce the laws, this isn't a discussion about internet per se, it's not excluded from the laws of the society. Other phenomenons are also thriving on the internet like credit card frauds. By your logic this isn't society's responsibility either, we simply have to accept the current state and adapt.

Even if the laws are wrong? And even more "bad" laws are being introduced?

I'm simply taking the discussion back to the topic. A discussion about the theoretical basis of a copyright law.

Re: The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

#67

Post by Helianthus »

ignifero wrote: post #63
Helianthus wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it does in fact. It isn't society's responsibility to make writing profitable. Just because the internet et al are making it harder to make a living as a writer doesn't mean we have any responsibility to turn around and make it easier.

It isn't society's responsibility to make writing profitable. Society rewards everything that benefits itself (at least the society i have agreed to live into). For example it rewards good scientific research because it makes everyone more productive and happier. I believe it has a good reason to make it profitable for writers to write good books too.

Let me amend it to say it isn't _necessarily_ society's responsibility to make writing profitable, and from what I've seen enough good writing gets done without being profitable that the distinction between professional writer and serious amateur writer is no longer meaningful.

Re: The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

#68

Post by conanite »

olavk wrote: post #43

Intellectual property at least makes a certain sense, since it is something you create yourself out of thin air, and therefore can decide to make available to others under certain conditions if both parties agree. If you don't make it available, nobody suffers, and if you do, you have created value without depriving others, so it is only fair to receive compensation. Owning land, on the other hand is clearly immoral.…

Granting exclusive access to exploit a resource avoids the tragedy of the commons - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

The argument for ownership of land is solid and clear; the argument for intellectual property, less so.

Re: The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

#69

Post by conanite »

jarrett wrote: post #37

While I agree that our current intellectual property system is doing a great deal of harm (particularly due to it being slanted in favor of monied interests), there is a protect-the-little-guy rationale for some form of copyright. Let's imagine a world without copyright. Suppose I spend a year writing a novel. This novel is great; it has the capacity to become the #1 bestseller, provided the right marketing is there.…

> Suppose I spend a year writing a novel.

In a world without copyright, why would you even do that? The very concept of "#1 bestseller" would disappear, probably with interesting ramifications for cultural diversity.

Re: The 'intellectual property' oxymoron

#70

Post by gnaritas »

jarrett wrote: post #37

While I agree that our current intellectual property system is doing a great deal of harm (particularly due to it being slanted in favor of monied interests), there is a protect-the-little-guy rationale for some form of copyright. Let's imagine a world without copyright. Suppose I spend a year writing a novel. This novel is great; it has the capacity to become the #1 bestseller, provided the right marketing is there.…

> Let's imagine a world without copyright. Suppose I spend a year writing a novel.

You'd know up front this probably isn't a profitable venture because writers would be starving artist types in such a world; novels would be written out of passion, not for income.

Post reply on HN