I kind of groaned when I saw this title on HN. Problem? The title told me it was going to be a highly-emotional appeal to an audience already primed to agree w

I kind of groaned when I saw this title on HN. Problem? The title told me it was going to be a highly-emotional appeal to an audience already primed to agree with it. And the vote score only confirmed that assumption. Time to put on the old critical thinking hat. What a great article! It was a wonderfully-put-together rant about what is wrong with IP law. I agree with every point -- including the outrage the author felt. The only thing I didn't agree with? The premise -- that IP laws are blocking innovation. Yes, as the examples show, there is a great amount of innovation that is being stifled by IP laws, and something is desperately needed to fix it. But let's not get caught up in all that emotional outrage at how screwed up things are. Instead, ask a simple question: to what degree is all innovation stifled by IP laws? Because that's the claim: that every kind of innovation is being stifled by the current crappy state of IP laws. Clearly that's not the case at all. The newspaper boy who invents a new newspaper folder isn't being stifled. The restaurant owner who comes up with a way to wait more tables with less staff isn't being stifled. The media creator who packages his product in a way to increase stickiness isn't being stifled. It's just a bunch of examples that members of this audience already know and are sympathetic with. I could go on. And on and on. So yes, in this one area in which we are all pretty damn angry to begin with, IP laws are totally destroying innovation. But in the other thousand or so areas from which most of us have little experience, they are not. I loved the rant. And I love a great title and this article had one. A little hyperbole is good for the soul. So while I have no faults with the article, I'd just recommend a little bit of common sense when dealing with a premise so over the top. People have a tendency to take whatever they're really angry about -- and then apply it to whatever problems the world is facing. IP law is not stifling all innovation. It isn't even coming close. But it's definitely horribly broken and needs to be fixed.