5 ms·

I'm not a fan of patents but I don't understand your comment. What exactly is violent about this?

by watty 11y ago

geomark 11y ago
Patents themselves aren't violent. Patents allow one to invoke violence by the state by having armed men (US marshalls in this case) confiscate property and in some cases arrest people.
- chasing 11y ago
  Yes. In many cases individuals are allowed to invoke the power of the state. By calling that power "violence" are you arguing that the state should not be able to take action to protect people?
  - geomark 11y ago
    Not arguing for or against anything. Armed men taking property and prisoners is violence regardless if it is sanctioned by the state or not. Civilized society wants that sort of violence if it is applied to violent crime. The same society might debate if that sort of violence is appropriate for other activities.
geofft 11y ago
The only way you can enforce a patent is by having armed law enforcement do so (as they did in this case), or relying on the perception that armed law enforcement could do so. That said, this argument would essentially hold that to live in civilized society (at least, as we understand civilization), to take advantage of tax-funded things like roads, to make use of government-enforced currencies, etc. is also violence. Which might be technically true, but is not useful, and certainly not useful for the goal of getting the rest of the world to be less violent; I know very few people whose brand of non-violence does not involve attempting to stop other people's violence. Indeed, a serious application of this argument would require one not to use the Internet, which was government-funded (i.e., funded by tax dollars, i.e., funded by money taken at implicit threat-of-gunpoint from citizens) out of military budgets (violence incarnate) and is still a bit government-run, and it would certainly require one not to use Hacker News, given how much Y Combinator firmly requires a strong conception of private property. So I think our pal Sonic the Hedgehog's famous quote applies, although the context is slightly different: http://i.imgur.com/wi1QIgG.jpg http://i.imgur.com/wi1QIgG.jpg
- AndrewKemendo 11y ago
  So I think our pal Sonic the Hedgehog's famous quote applies, although the context is slightly different: http://i.imgur.com/wi1QIgG.jpg* http://i.imgur.com/wi1QIgG.jpg* Well that certainly wasn't expected, but was good for an absurdist chuckle. Why would someone put this together with Sonic? Purely for the absurdity?
  - geofft 11y ago
    I think the backstory there is roughly https://twitter.com/sonic_hedgehog/status/616316157109256192 https://twitter.com/sonic_hedgehog/status/616316157109256192 (The remainder of @sonic_hedgehog is also amazingly absurdist, but usually not particularly anti-capitalist.)
- geomark 11y ago
  I like your thought process but I think you follow an incorrect path of reasoning because of the implicit assumption that if an act is considered violent it is to be avoided. The world is full of violent people who are only kept at bay by the threat of counter-violence. For that reason, violence is required in a civilized society. So we shouldn't avoid calling it what it is, and should acknowledge it so we can make good decisions about when to apply violence.
- bonestamp2 11y ago
  > The only way you can enforce a patent is by having armed law enforcement do so Couldn't you just take them to court?
  - geofft 11y ago
    "... or relying on the perception that armed law enforcement could do so." I can take you to court, and you can say, "sure, whatever, you and what army." You'll only care if you think there's an actual army (or police force) who'll make you do what the courts tell you to do. Otherwise any judgment against you doesn't bother you. Note that this is exactly why Chinese knockoffs/counterfeits of US tech products are such a big market: US courts have no jurisdiction in China, and the US Marshals can't keep up with all of the imports.

I'm not a fan of patents but I don't understand your comment. What exactly is violent about this?

by watty 11y ago

I'm not a fan of patents but I don't understand your comment. What exactly is violent about this?

Patents themselves aren't violent. Patents allow one to invoke violence by the state by having armed men (US marshalls in this case) confiscate property and in some cases arrest people.

chasing 11y ago
Yes. In many cases individuals are allowed to invoke the power of the state. By calling that power "violence" are you arguing that the state should not be able to take action to protect people?
- geomark 11y ago
  Not arguing for or against anything. Armed men taking property and prisoners is violence regardless if it is sanctioned by the state or not. Civilized society wants that sort of violence if it is applied to violent crime. The same society might debate if that sort of violence is appropriate for other activities.

geofft 11y ago

The only way you can enforce a patent is by having armed law enforcement do so (as they did in this case), or relying on the perception that armed law enforcement could do so. That said, this argument would essentially hold that to live in civilized society (at least, as we understand civilization), to take advantage of tax-funded things like roads, to make use of government-enforced currencies, etc. is also violence. Which might be technically true, but is not useful, and certainly not useful for the goal of getting the rest of the world to be less violent; I know very few people whose brand of non-violence does not involve attempting to stop other people's violence. Indeed, a serious application of this argument would require one not to use the Internet, which was government-funded (i.e., funded by tax dollars, i.e., funded by money taken at implicit threat-of-gunpoint from citizens) out of military budgets (violence incarnate) and is still a bit government-run, and it would certainly require one not to use Hacker News, given how much Y Combinator firmly requires a strong conception of private property. So I think our pal Sonic the Hedgehog's famous quote applies, although the context is slightly different: http://i.imgur.com/wi1QIgG.jpg http://i.imgur.com/wi1QIgG.jpg

AndrewKemendo 11y ago
So I think our pal Sonic the Hedgehog's famous quote applies, although the context is slightly different: http://i.imgur.com/wi1QIgG.jpg* http://i.imgur.com/wi1QIgG.jpg* Well that certainly wasn't expected, but was good for an absurdist chuckle. Why would someone put this together with Sonic? Purely for the absurdity?
- geofft 11y ago
  I think the backstory there is roughly https://twitter.com/sonic_hedgehog/status/616316157109256192 https://twitter.com/sonic_hedgehog/status/616316157109256192 (The remainder of @sonic_hedgehog is also amazingly absurdist, but usually not particularly anti-capitalist.)
geomark 11y ago
I like your thought process but I think you follow an incorrect path of reasoning because of the implicit assumption that if an act is considered violent it is to be avoided. The world is full of violent people who are only kept at bay by the threat of counter-violence. For that reason, violence is required in a civilized society. So we shouldn't avoid calling it what it is, and should acknowledge it so we can make good decisions about when to apply violence.
bonestamp2 11y ago
> The only way you can enforce a patent is by having armed law enforcement do so Couldn't you just take them to court?
- geofft 11y ago
  "... or relying on the perception that armed law enforcement could do so." I can take you to court, and you can say, "sure, whatever, you and what army." You'll only care if you think there's an actual army (or police force) who'll make you do what the courts tell you to do. Otherwise any judgment against you doesn't bother you. Note that this is exactly why Chinese knockoffs/counterfeits of US tech products are such a big market: US courts have no jurisdiction in China, and the US Marshals can't keep up with all of the imports.