[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/politics/ - News & Politics

Politics, News, Current Events

Catalog

See 8chan's new software in development (discuss) (help out)
Infinity Next Beta period has started, click here for info or go directly to beta.8ch.net
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Flag *
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Sister Boards [ Third position ] [ National Socialism ] [ Anarchism ] [ Anarcho-capitalism ] [ Marxism-Leninism ] [ Psychopolitics ] [ Philosophy ] [ International ] [ History ]

[ Board log ] [ ###politics### ]

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT: THE CACHE IS BROKEN ATM. USE THE CATALOG TO CHECK FOR NEW THREADS


File: 1447879014172.jpg (46.68 KB, 740x513, 740:513, tpp-march.jpg)

000000 No.6448

What do you think about intellectual property?

5e7eda No.6450

>>6448

Copyrights/Patents are necessary to establish property rights and incentivize production, even if the current system is outrageous.

Intellectual Property is just code word for patent/trademark trolling ideas though.


912917 No.6490

>>6450

>"anarchist"

>needs an authoritarian force from above to enforce copyright

NAP is one thing, but this is absolutely retarded. How is it going to work?

>inb4 nerd rants about how the common man is going to enforce an uniform censoring of copyrighted works through private courts and privately financed cyber police watchdogs and if you just enforce my autistically impractical system it might just work!


a33c1e No.6492

I think that patents should be around to ensure that proper credit is due for historical accuracy, but the idea that nobody can make a game or short film without consulting you is fucking stupid, if you're so good with your content then people will pay for yours because its the best.


5aa3ac No.6493

>>6490

I'm glad to hear you recognize the failures of government without me having to point them out to you, anon. Feel free to connect the dots in your spare time.


c24f50 No.6494

>>6448

Copyright is different from physical property.

Regular property is the claim to a specific instance of a thing.

Copyright is the claim to prevent people from copying what you have done with their own property, just so you can maintain an arbitrarily high amount of profit. I can use my own property of a harddrive, but making a certain arrangement of 1s and 0s on my harddrive is banned, so copyright is not a real form of property at all.

Copyright is also so hard to enforce that it's becoming pointless, and it also tends only to act to fuck over some poor guy's life randomly every now and then, while the vast majority get away with it.

Copyright is shit. Now, that doesn't mean there aren't forms of intellectual property that can be legit.

For example, I think that people should have the right to own specific digital structures such as websites and so on. Copyright however is a form of IP that has nothing in common with property really, since it actually prevents you from using your own property how you want.

I think the only exceptions that should be made is data that needs protecting like passwords and so on. Otherwise, copyright should be massively phased out and replaced with legit intellectual property as control over specific digital structures and control over having your own harddrive modified by others.

So, in summation, IP is a legitimate concept, but as it actually exists it is not a real form of property at all, but a way of preventing other people from using their property how they want, and therefore calling copyright "property" is just a sneaky way of legitimizing to propertarians who if they otherwise thought of it in more detail would generally oppose copyright and patents and so on, as being ways of getting artificially high profits by getting the government to stop other people from modifying their own property.

>>6492

>I think that patents should be around to ensure that proper credit is due for historical accuracy

Then you could just pay for a record of who was first for reputations sake and because people like to use the original, not pay to attack other people configuring their property like yours.

Besides, the internet does a remarkably good job of recording when things happen. We even know to a good degree of accuracy when certain obscure memes first appeared.


9099d6 No.6495

>>6448

Most jewish shit ever

>Oy vey goy you used a word that belongs to me, just look at this government paperwork

>That'll be six million shekels


200735 No.6497

If you want to keep exclusive rights to what you do, you just don't give plans to anyone.

Patent rights protecting companies against reverse engineering is prime kikery.


726192 No.6502

File: 1448048338200.jpg (1.26 MB, 5000x5000, 1:1, 1447466521024.jpg)

The whole patent system is so rife with abuse that it's better just to toss it out altogether. There are ways of protecting your ability to produce things that require lots of capital to develop, like inter-corporation contracts of fair business practice or certification companies only doing business with said companies.

There are some industries that will absolutely refuse to budge on this, though. Big pharma loves to complain that they'd all go out of business if they even get a whiff of competition. What they don't want to admit is that reverse engineering is fucking EXPENSIVE. If they truly invented something ground-breaking that requires a huge R&D budget then it would take proportionally astronomical costs to decipher the recipe. Even if this wasn't the case, you can't just produce generics in your garage. Production is extremely expensive no matter how you discover the recipe. A lot of their costs come from the extremely strong FDA standards/testing/regulation, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. After all that, they still make enormous profits every year because the US government lets them shut out all international competition. Could you imagine any other industry doing that?


de476f No.6506

It needs serious reform, to say the least.


4e21a7 No.6549

you don't own my mind or the ideas within other people's brains therefore you can't own the intangible and IP is one of the filthiest manifestations of an overbearing government

expect lots of civil war if you think a natsoc state should enforce stupidity such as IP or taxing income property sales and inheritance all at once


6c7f45 No.6551

More or less a regurgitation of what everyone else has said. I'd also like to add that patents on scientific discoveries and the like are extra bullshit (though citing studies in publications is still pretty important and should be done). Knowledge should not be limited for someone's profits.


80e6c3 No.6566

How are authors, directors, artists supposed to make money without exclusive rights to their ideas?


be3a5e No.6576

File: 1448388572852.jpg (50.43 KB, 480x360, 4:3, sleep watch.jpg)

There is no such thing as intellectual property, whether it's asserted through policy or not. It is utterly imaginary, and basically just creates an honor system for dishonorable people. Personally, I'd be content to throw the whole thing out and see what actually happens without it.

>>6566

By making the most competitive offer, like anyone else in any other industry. Although admittedly, industrialization of art is more fundamentally dependent on popular sentiment than other fields, so artists looking to make money will be less secure, but everyone knows that's an inherent part of being an artist. Alternatively, can you actually imagine a financially secure artist that wouldn't just abuse the system the way virtually every copyright holder currently does?

Furthermore, where does an idea come from? Other ideas. 100% of the time. Assuming IP laws worked according to their ideals, if you expect the next guy to pay you royalties for platforming off of your idea, think about how many people you would then owe residuals to, and how fractal the whole thing would become.

The entire sense of value in the concept of intellectual property is based on dysfunctionally wishful thinking that doesn't account for how insane a theory it is in actual practice of any kind. Nobody even truly even knows what the alternative to intellectual property is or what kind of climate it would create, they just know they're afraid of being vulnerable to competition in general. That's why these kinds of legislation never come up except through corporate lobbyism. As far as I'm concerned, that's as much of a red flag as anyone should need to realize whether or not it's a legitimate public interest.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]