There is a difference between the concept of patents and copyright, and the very obviously broken implementation of that ideas that exists in society currently.

There is a difference between the concept of patents and copyright, and the very obviously broken implementation of that ideas that exists in society currently. Saying there's no good reason for IP rights because lawyers can get their way by brute force, is like saying there's no good reason for anyone to ever eat pizza because the pizza place makes bad pizza. Please separate the implementation from the idea. It's fair to argue that in our current court system and regulatory environment that removing IP protections would be better (i think that's debatable), but it seems intellectually dishonest to say there are no good reasons for IP at the conceptual level.