The comparison works because it's an argument against reductionism, not an argument for or against "sharing a small piece of data" which is very similar to insi

The comparison works because it's an argument against reductionism, not an argument for or against "sharing a small piece of data" which is very similar to insider trading, or child pornography (after all, it's just a sequence of one's and zeros right?). The point here is that saying "it's ok, it's data" isn't itself a good argument because it relies on reductionism or consideration of the effects of sharing the information. You could say you don't care about the effects, but it is invalid to deny their existence. For the record, I'm anti-copyright and anti-patents.