4 ms·
It seems to me very intuitive that a lack of IP protection of some sort discourages innovation. I cannot imagine wanting to write a book if I didn't have some
by regulation_d 6y ago
It seems to me very intuitive that a lack of IP protection of some sort discourages innovation.
I cannot imagine wanting to write a book if I didn't have some recourse against people distributing my book freely.
The policy concerns around IP protection for both patent and copyright are clear: the minimum amount of protection that doesn't discourage innovation.
Lawmakers know or should know that we all benefit from a rich public domain, which is why there are limitations on both copyright and patents in terms of both duration and general application, and I am happy to argue that copyright is too strong, particularly in terms of duration (thanks Disney), but I simply can't agree that we "would be better off without any kind of copyright or IP".
- npsimons 6y ago> I cannot imagine wanting to write a book if I didn't have some recourse against people distributing my book freely. Your lack of imagination is disappointing, and also hints at a failure of empathy.
- regulation_d 6y agoThere are so many ways of distributing thought and expression with little to no cost other than the time and effort of the creator. In practice, books almost always require more. I'm struggling to see how using a blog instead, is some sort of "failure of empathy". But I guess the broader point remains, even if only 20% of potential authors are, like me, so evil that they wouldn't devote a year of their lives to writing a book that they couldn't monetize in some way, well that's still represents a 20% decrease in innovation on some level.