4 ms·
I think the term "intellectual property" is like when someone pisses on you and calls it "rain". It makes no sense. The idea if I was on an island and can't sh
by breck 7y ago
I think the term "intellectual property" is like when someone pisses on you and calls it "rain".
It makes no sense. The idea if I was on an island and can't share freely share some ideas of yours that you hold the "copyright" has zero correlation with any notion of property, and is much better described as slavery -- a form of control over my behavior.
> especially while there are people suffering actual physical slavery in the world today.
People in America in the red states are getting royally f*cked by Intellectual Slavery laws, while IS royalties are pouring into the blue states. I think there's a very real harm in not calling a spade a spade. Look at China. If they had been playing by the Intellectual Slavery regime of the West for the past 2 decades, they would not have lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty. Instead they'd be sending what little they had to Bill Gates' pocket.
- jcims 7y agoI'm out. Hit me up when 'slavery' just doesn't deliver the punch you're after and you move on to intellectual genocide. We're basically in the verbal equivalent of the audio loudness wars. There's no dynamic range left in our speech, everything is theft, hate, rape, violence, racism, fascism and of course slavery on some ever increasing but poorly articulated spectrum.
- breck 7y agoI'm using logic. Intellectual Slavery is a logical term that corresponds much more closely to the rest of our language than IP. "A slave is a person owned by someone and slavery is the state of being under the control of someone where a person is forced to work for another" I think "Intellectual Monopoly" is a good term too, if the term "Slavery" makes you queasy. I think they are both 10x-100x more accurate than the current "IP" lies.
- dane-pgp 7y agoMight I suggest the slightly less emotive term "intellectual monopoly" instead?
- breck 7y agoI think "intellectual monopoly" is a good term. If we switched nomenclature to that, I think it's a great step in the right direction. But when I hear the term IP, what I hear is "Intellectual Slavery", as you are declaring control over human behavior, which is the definition of slavery ("restricted freedom"). I'm not necessarily against Intellectual Slavery laws. If we as a people decide it's better to have those laws than not, that's fine. Just let's use honest terms here.