4 ms·

It is for intellectual property, because while the cost of copying is negligible, the cost of creating the IP is real.

• Spivak 11y ago
  You know how people use the term e-sports to refer to playing video games professionally instead of sports? The same is true for Copyright. It's not property. It's at most a 'property-like concept'. There are those of us who do not agree with Copyright and would gladly suffer the negatives to be rid of it.
  • bduerst 11y ago
    That's a great comparison because e-sports is sports, just as intellectual property is property. I'm curious how you think the cost of IP generation should be distributed across an economy, because it sounds like you want content-creators to "suffer the negatives" for your own personal gain.
  • s73v3r 11y ago
    "There are those of us who do not agree with Copyright and would gladly suffer the negatives to be rid of it." And most of these people are not people who are trying to earn a living from their works.
    • Spivak 11y ago
      The problem with this argument is that the underlying assumption is, "I have a right to make a living through the sale of information." This is a popular idea to say the least, but it's a positive right which is why I disagree with it. I do not think that people should be able to own ideas and information. > And most of these people are not people who are trying to earn a living from their works. You could make the same argument to a person who wanted to abolish slavery. Just because someone is earning a living by doing something doesn't mean it's right.