5 ms·

We wouldn't have modern civilization without IP law. Curious how you make a living; if it's like anything like the vast majority of the people on this site, or

We wouldn't have modern civilization without IP law. Curious how you make a living; if it's like anything like the vast majority of the people on this site, or society in general for that matter, it's rooted in laws protecting theft of intellectual property.

alacombe 6y ago
> We wouldn't have modern civilization without IP law. Disney focused copyright laws have nothing to do with the development of modern civilization. There is plenty of case where overly tight licensing has proven detrimental to a technology.
lolc 6y ago
The term "intellectual property" lumps together quite disparate concepts. It's not helpful to use it. And "theft" is a poor analogy. I'd say society wouldn't change much if copyright were abolished. Probably for the better. Claiming authorship should still be protected in my opinion, see next point. Trademark law gives some nice protections to consumers, so I'd vote for that one to stay. Patent law? Ahhahaha where do I begin? To think that we rely on that crutch to develop medication makes my head hurt.
- mminer237 6y ago
  Wouldn't programming, writing, music, and art as careers basically be gone overnight without copyright? Who is going to create a book, video game, or movie when they can't sell it? Programmers would be the best off of those I guess, but only because they would have the option to move all code server-side to stop piracy.
  - Fargren 6y ago
    Copyright law has existed for only a few centuries, and people created art and science before it, as careers, for the entirety of human history. These jobs would be a lot different without IP law. They might be payed less and be done less, or maybe not. If they are payed less, it's true probably they wouldn't be as prolific. But they would still exist, it's disingenuous to claim IP law is a requirement for creative endeavors. As a matter of fact, programming already works as if IP law didn't exist from the point of view of many programmers.I'm hired by a company to produce a product, in exchange for a salary. I don't know any IP that I might produce as a result of my work. I'm simply paid for my time. Could (as an example) novel writers be payed for the time spent writing a book rather than as a function of the sales of their books? I see not logistical reason why not. Maybe the market won't bear many writers under those conditions... But they would still exist, right? Note: I think Trademark law is really good. And patents have issues but they are mostly good. I'm only talking about copyright here. I'm not entirely against the concept of IP, but I do think copyright law is not nearly as critical as it's made out to be. Maybe the optimal solution is weak copyright rather than no copyright, but I think it's important to understand that no copyright is not as crazy as it sounds.
    - mminer237 6y ago
      Computers, speakers, monitors, and printers didn't exist for most of human history. Reproducing a work was quite an ordeal, you couldn't just upload it to your website where anyone could google it and download it in two seconds. Also, for most of human history, artists were funded by doing commissions. People wouldn't create music and movies for their fans, they would do it for the millionaires who could afford it, a la Once Upon a Time in Shaolin. As for programming, maybe you don't care about your IP, but your company sure does. How would your company be funded if anybody could download its product? A few products might be able to survive just by being developed just for government contracts or for other large companies, but any care for ordinary consumers would be gone. And there is no similar market for books. Sure you could set up a book-writing company like you could now but where would the money for those salaries come from? No one will pay the company for a book they can download for free more easily.
      - int_19h 6y ago
        How about sane copyright terms at least, for starters?
      - Fargren 6y ago
        There are many things to answer to here, but let me pick at least a few > As for programming, maybe you don't care about your IP, but your company sure does. I don't think they do. The software I write is used by workers in my company's warehouse. It's valuable because it makes their job easier. Sure, we don't give the software away, but we also don't sell it. We would lose very little if we released it for free. I know this doesn't apply to all software, but it applies to a sizable amount of it. It would be interesting to measure which fraction of time spent writing software is for projects like this, I don't know how to even begin estimating it. > Sure you could set up a book-writing company like you could now but where would the money for those salaries come from? Some ideas, in no particular order. Asa I said before, maybe reduces the amount of books that get written, but can't say for sure. -Preorders. The publisher commits to only releasing a book once it has received X orders for it. GMT does this for boardgames. -Patreon-like model, or plain subscriptions. Customers commit to paying for whatever is released, or just pay periodically and the publisher/author commits to releasing stuff that makes customers happy. -Making nice editions: this could get very competitive, but surely a publisher who makes nice editions would still sell them. The publisher would be incentivized to pay popular authors to create books so it has more stuff to sell, even if other people could make other editions.
userbinator 6y ago
China isn't "modern civilization"...? ;-) https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=284 https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=284
errantspark 6y ago
I am calling for a refactor, not anarchy. I will go on record as saying that we would be better off as a society with drastically reduced intellectual property protections, especially along the temporal axis. You shouldn't be able to hold onto IP of any sort for more than a decade or so under any circumstances.
- dendodge 6y ago
  I'd even accept life. I don't necessarily agree, but I can see the argument that someone should have the exclusive right to profit from their work for the rest of their life. Maybe even add a few years as a grace period to give the estate time to adjust business practices in response to a sudden death. But why we need to add another 70 years is a mystery to me. How does that encourage creativity and innovation?
dendodge 6y ago
Avoiding the obvious argument that theft is a poor choice of word for this case, I'd like to question whether we actually treat intellectual and traditional property as similarly as IP proponents like to claim. If you sell me an antique chair, I'm free to upcycle it, transform it into something new, and sell it on. I'm free to examine it and build an exact replica. I can give my chair to whomever I want and let any number of strangers sit on it. Such is the nature of property. If you sell me a song, I must keep it in your proprietary system, leave the DRM intact, and definitely never even think about remixing it and selling my derived works. IP is not property, it's a distinct beast of its own. It can't be "stolen" in the traditional sense, and it seems it can't really be bought or sold either.

alacombe 6y ago

> We wouldn't have modern civilization without IP law. Disney focused copyright laws have nothing to do with the development of modern civilization. There is plenty of case where overly tight licensing has proven detrimental to a technology.

lolc 6y ago

The term "intellectual property" lumps together quite disparate concepts. It's not helpful to use it. And "theft" is a poor analogy. I'd say society wouldn't change much if copyright were abolished. Probably for the better. Claiming authorship should still be protected in my opinion, see next point. Trademark law gives some nice protections to consumers, so I'd vote for that one to stay. Patent law? Ahhahaha where do I begin? To think that we rely on that crutch to develop medication makes my head hurt.

mminer237 6y ago
Wouldn't programming, writing, music, and art as careers basically be gone overnight without copyright? Who is going to create a book, video game, or movie when they can't sell it? Programmers would be the best off of those I guess, but only because they would have the option to move all code server-side to stop piracy.
- Fargren 6y ago
  Copyright law has existed for only a few centuries, and people created art and science before it, as careers, for the entirety of human history. These jobs would be a lot different without IP law. They might be payed less and be done less, or maybe not. If they are payed less, it's true probably they wouldn't be as prolific. But they would still exist, it's disingenuous to claim IP law is a requirement for creative endeavors. As a matter of fact, programming already works as if IP law didn't exist from the point of view of many programmers.I'm hired by a company to produce a product, in exchange for a salary. I don't know any IP that I might produce as a result of my work. I'm simply paid for my time. Could (as an example) novel writers be payed for the time spent writing a book rather than as a function of the sales of their books? I see not logistical reason why not. Maybe the market won't bear many writers under those conditions... But they would still exist, right? Note: I think Trademark law is really good. And patents have issues but they are mostly good. I'm only talking about copyright here. I'm not entirely against the concept of IP, but I do think copyright law is not nearly as critical as it's made out to be. Maybe the optimal solution is weak copyright rather than no copyright, but I think it's important to understand that no copyright is not as crazy as it sounds.
  - mminer237 6y ago
    Computers, speakers, monitors, and printers didn't exist for most of human history. Reproducing a work was quite an ordeal, you couldn't just upload it to your website where anyone could google it and download it in two seconds. Also, for most of human history, artists were funded by doing commissions. People wouldn't create music and movies for their fans, they would do it for the millionaires who could afford it, a la Once Upon a Time in Shaolin. As for programming, maybe you don't care about your IP, but your company sure does. How would your company be funded if anybody could download its product? A few products might be able to survive just by being developed just for government contracts or for other large companies, but any care for ordinary consumers would be gone. And there is no similar market for books. Sure you could set up a book-writing company like you could now but where would the money for those salaries come from? No one will pay the company for a book they can download for free more easily.
    - int_19h 6y ago
      How about sane copyright terms at least, for starters?
    - Fargren 6y ago
      There are many things to answer to here, but let me pick at least a few > As for programming, maybe you don't care about your IP, but your company sure does. I don't think they do. The software I write is used by workers in my company's warehouse. It's valuable because it makes their job easier. Sure, we don't give the software away, but we also don't sell it. We would lose very little if we released it for free. I know this doesn't apply to all software, but it applies to a sizable amount of it. It would be interesting to measure which fraction of time spent writing software is for projects like this, I don't know how to even begin estimating it. > Sure you could set up a book-writing company like you could now but where would the money for those salaries come from? Some ideas, in no particular order. Asa I said before, maybe reduces the amount of books that get written, but can't say for sure. -Preorders. The publisher commits to only releasing a book once it has received X orders for it. GMT does this for boardgames. -Patreon-like model, or plain subscriptions. Customers commit to paying for whatever is released, or just pay periodically and the publisher/author commits to releasing stuff that makes customers happy. -Making nice editions: this could get very competitive, but surely a publisher who makes nice editions would still sell them. The publisher would be incentivized to pay popular authors to create books so it has more stuff to sell, even if other people could make other editions.

userbinator 6y ago

China isn't "modern civilization"...? ;-) https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=284 https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=284

errantspark 6y ago

I am calling for a refactor, not anarchy. I will go on record as saying that we would be better off as a society with drastically reduced intellectual property protections, especially along the temporal axis. You shouldn't be able to hold onto IP of any sort for more than a decade or so under any circumstances.

dendodge 6y ago
I'd even accept life. I don't necessarily agree, but I can see the argument that someone should have the exclusive right to profit from their work for the rest of their life. Maybe even add a few years as a grace period to give the estate time to adjust business practices in response to a sudden death. But why we need to add another 70 years is a mystery to me. How does that encourage creativity and innovation?

dendodge 6y ago

Avoiding the obvious argument that theft is a poor choice of word for this case, I'd like to question whether we actually treat intellectual and traditional property as similarly as IP proponents like to claim. If you sell me an antique chair, I'm free to upcycle it, transform it into something new, and sell it on. I'm free to examine it and build an exact replica. I can give my chair to whomever I want and let any number of strangers sit on it. Such is the nature of property. If you sell me a song, I must keep it in your proprietary system, leave the DRM intact, and definitely never even think about remixing it and selling my derived works. IP is not property, it's a distinct beast of its own. It can't be "stolen" in the traditional sense, and it seems it can't really be bought or sold either.