4 ms·

What if you spent 9 months making a baby, and then 20 years nurturing and feeding that baby. Suddenly you have this superior thing that wouldn't exist without y

by soperj 8y ago

What if you spent 9 months making a baby, and then 20 years nurturing and feeding that baby. Suddenly you have this superior thing that wouldn't exist without your work. Clearly that result should be your intellectual property.

xxpor 8y ago
IMHO the only reason that hasn't been tried in court is because we can't clone humans from skin cells left in public. Once we can, I'm sure someone's going to try to make a Michael Phelps or Barry Bonds.
- EvanAnderson 8y ago
  "The Quail?" Joe spluttered. "He's about the most powerful man in the country. He's your enemy?" "Sort of. He can't have sex unless I allow it." Joe decided that big business was not among his aptitudes. "Years ago, the Quail received a gene augmentation that gave him enough charm to succeed despite his lack of intellect. Since I'm the one who invented his personality genes, I hold the copyright on his character. The Quail can't reproduce without my permission. Nor can he retransmit or rebroadcast his genes without the expressed, written consent of WonkaGen Inc." http://www.joelbenford.plus.com/teabowl/byauthor/wonka.htm http://www.joelbenford.plus.com/teabowl/byauthor/wonka.htm
akgoel 8y ago
Patent would run out in 20 years. But, that’s a novel way to use the justice system to screen spouses for your kids!
chicob 8y ago
That argument is not very cogent because the idea of owning a person is too outrageous. But if you change it sligthly to owning copyright over some dog breed, that emotional objection would dissipate in my opinion. So if someone were to cross two or three breeds of dogs and make a stable, new breed, can that someone patent it and own it? What about every single pup that is eventually born? Can the breeder claim intellectual property rights over it? Of course this is nonsense, but some companies will try and are trying their luck.

by soperj 8y ago

xxpor 8y ago

IMHO the only reason that hasn't been tried in court is because we can't clone humans from skin cells left in public. Once we can, I'm sure someone's going to try to make a Michael Phelps or Barry Bonds.

EvanAnderson 8y ago
"The Quail?" Joe spluttered. "He's about the most powerful man in the country. He's your enemy?" "Sort of. He can't have sex unless I allow it." Joe decided that big business was not among his aptitudes. "Years ago, the Quail received a gene augmentation that gave him enough charm to succeed despite his lack of intellect. Since I'm the one who invented his personality genes, I hold the copyright on his character. The Quail can't reproduce without my permission. Nor can he retransmit or rebroadcast his genes without the expressed, written consent of WonkaGen Inc." http://www.joelbenford.plus.com/teabowl/byauthor/wonka.htm http://www.joelbenford.plus.com/teabowl/byauthor/wonka.htm

akgoel 8y ago

Patent would run out in 20 years. But, that’s a novel way to use the justice system to screen spouses for your kids!

chicob 8y ago

That argument is not very cogent because the idea of owning a person is too outrageous. But if you change it sligthly to owning copyright over some dog breed, that emotional objection would dissipate in my opinion. So if someone were to cross two or three breeds of dogs and make a stable, new breed, can that someone patent it and own it? What about every single pup that is eventually born? Can the breeder claim intellectual property rights over it? Of course this is nonsense, but some companies will try and are trying their luck.