This is the real InfoWars, streaming every Thursday at 8 p.m. ET. Support our mission and become a member at https://membership.theonion.comExplore our websi...
Tbh I agree with the general spirit of what they are saying but IP is obviously a valid legal construct and wishing it wasn’t doesn’t change that, and I didn’t really appreciate being "well aCkshULly"d so I hit the down arrow anyway lol
Intellectual property is as real as any other property is: it’s all made up by people, but it has the force of social/economic/governmental institutions behind it so it can affect your life.
It’s just that legal concepts tend to attract discussions by people who can’t tell the difference between a descriptive or positive argument (how things are) versus a normative argument (how things should be).
What the fuck are you even talking about? “Intellectual property” is a term pushed by corporations and their lawyers to lump together very different legal regimes like copyright, trademark, regional indications or patents, under one supposedly common name. Doing this really has the main advantage of making it possible to use the language of theft when talking about things that can be infinitely copied, and therefore can’t be stolen. “Stolen IP” makes about as much sense as “unauthorised colour”.
It’s a brand, a name. It’s not “IP”. There is no such thing as intellectual property, it’s a manipulative term.
That being said, agree with the sentiment! This is great 😊
People arguing against IP either have never created anything, or have their “creative” endeavours backed by family wealth.
Tbh I agree with the general spirit of what they are saying but IP is obviously a valid legal construct and wishing it wasn’t doesn’t change that, and I didn’t really appreciate being "well aCkshULly"d so I hit the down arrow anyway lol
Intellectual property is as real as any other property is: it’s all made up by people, but it has the force of social/economic/governmental institutions behind it so it can affect your life.
It’s just that legal concepts tend to attract discussions by people who can’t tell the difference between a descriptive or positive argument (how things are) versus a normative argument (how things should be).
What the fuck are you even talking about? “Intellectual property” is a term pushed by corporations and their lawyers to lump together very different legal regimes like copyright, trademark, regional indications or patents, under one supposedly common name. Doing this really has the main advantage of making it possible to use the language of theft when talking about things that can be infinitely copied, and therefore can’t be stolen. “Stolen IP” makes about as much sense as “unauthorised colour”.
Well, next time you create something useful, I hope you share it with everyone for free
Are you by any chance a sovcit?
Uh, no. What would make you think this?
All this has been common knowledge in FOSS circles for ages.