4 ms·
I think that part of the problem with the whole idea vs execution debate is that it's an artificial consequence of our patent and copyright system. Patent/copy
by iamelgringo 19y ago
I think that part of the problem with the whole idea vs execution debate is that it's an artificial consequence of our patent and copyright system. Patent/copyright law is based on the premise that if you have an idea, document it and someone else uses that idea later, you "own" the idea and they might have to pay you. Those are really artificial constraints.
In any other creative endeavor: painting, sculpture, music it's the idea + execution that truly matters. If either one fails, your creation gets forgotten. I'd venture that any creator of Art, Science, Music, etc... knows the absurdity of "owning" the idea of of their creation. To the painter, the idea is simple a picture in your head. To anyone else, the idea of a melting clock sliding off a table is just an acid trip. After Salvadore Dali committed it to canvas, it was art. To anyone else, images of people and things as geometric blocks is just a little weird. After being executed by Picasso, it changed the world of art.
It's the idea + execution that matters.
- brlewis 19y agoThat has never been the premise of copyright, and patent law did not work that way up until about 20 years ago. In theory, ideas were never supposed to be patentable. A patent had to show both an idea and a specific implementation of it. Only with the increase of legally-questionable patents on software and business methods have ideas been patented.