3 ms·

to remove property laws is to remove markets by definition. You cannot sell anything you have no ownership over or rights to, given that everyone can just take

to remove property laws is to remove markets by definition. You cannot sell anything you have no ownership over or rights to, given that everyone can just take it. Hence why open source maintainers are barely paid, and companies in the space rely on selling services, not software. If you want, as the title of the article suggests, a world where people pay for software, strengthen IP laws instead of weakening them.

SequoiaHope 3y ago
Even libertarians argue that intellectual property is not real property and is incompatible with capitalism. Removing government-mandated IP restrictions is not "removing property laws", it is freeing innovators to copy what they hold in their hands without government intervention. They own the property they purchase or produce but they don't own the intangible ideas behind the thing. Mises Institute "How Intellectual Property Hampers Capitalism | Stephan Kinsella" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWShFz4d2RY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWShFz4d2RY
bee_rider 3y ago
I’m talking about intellectual property, the legal fiction invented to let people own ideas. I’m not sure why you’d bring up actual property rights. I don’t see any suggestions to remove property rights. This was the bit of confusion I was pointing out.
- Barrin92 3y ago
  All property rights are legal fiction, there's no "actual property rights". Owning ideas is perfectly reasonable because that's where the entire value is, and having rights to your own ideas guarantees that you are compensated for the invention and value they provide to others. Property rights, intellectual and non-intellectual, correctly allocate resources to value creators.
  - Chris2048 3y ago
    What if an idea has value independent from an inventor e.g. someone invents it independently. Novel-ty of invention is hard to prove. There is a strong incentive towards rent-seeking beyond the collaborative value invention is supposed to provide. There are "actual property rights" because an actual property is an actual property - owning one house doesn't mean you own them all. An idea is an abstract "property" that isn't like real estate at all, and most of the concerns highly subjective interpretation of scope and value.
    - Barrin92 3y ago
      there's strong incentive towards rent-seeking in all property schemes. The oldest form of rent seeking literally does concern physical property, land and real estate. Rent seeking is bad and common but eliminating property rights is worse, some have tried. And you generally can't own abstract ideas, you can't own the number '5', or 'wizard stories', only a particular logo design or Harry Potter. IP is only concerned with specific artifacts. They're intangible but not abstract, they're instantiations of ideas. If you produce intellectual work there are really only three ways to do that. Give it away for free and beg and provide services, accept some sort of feudal patronage (now reinvented on the internet) or have rights to what you make. The last one is the only thing that gives creators independence and compensates them directly, even if yes you have to settle subjective differences sometimes. Anyone who wants to abolish IP needs to tell me how a novelist earns a living without being reduced to some sort of begging.

SequoiaHope 3y ago

Even libertarians argue that intellectual property is not real property and is incompatible with capitalism. Removing government-mandated IP restrictions is not "removing property laws", it is freeing innovators to copy what they hold in their hands without government intervention. They own the property they purchase or produce but they don't own the intangible ideas behind the thing. Mises Institute "How Intellectual Property Hampers Capitalism | Stephan Kinsella" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWShFz4d2RY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWShFz4d2RY

bee_rider 3y ago

I’m talking about intellectual property, the legal fiction invented to let people own ideas. I’m not sure why you’d bring up actual property rights. I don’t see any suggestions to remove property rights. This was the bit of confusion I was pointing out.

Barrin92 3y ago
All property rights are legal fiction, there's no "actual property rights". Owning ideas is perfectly reasonable because that's where the entire value is, and having rights to your own ideas guarantees that you are compensated for the invention and value they provide to others. Property rights, intellectual and non-intellectual, correctly allocate resources to value creators.
- Chris2048 3y ago
  What if an idea has value independent from an inventor e.g. someone invents it independently. Novel-ty of invention is hard to prove. There is a strong incentive towards rent-seeking beyond the collaborative value invention is supposed to provide. There are "actual property rights" because an actual property is an actual property - owning one house doesn't mean you own them all. An idea is an abstract "property" that isn't like real estate at all, and most of the concerns highly subjective interpretation of scope and value.
  - Barrin92 3y ago
    there's strong incentive towards rent-seeking in all property schemes. The oldest form of rent seeking literally does concern physical property, land and real estate. Rent seeking is bad and common but eliminating property rights is worse, some have tried. And you generally can't own abstract ideas, you can't own the number '5', or 'wizard stories', only a particular logo design or Harry Potter. IP is only concerned with specific artifacts. They're intangible but not abstract, they're instantiations of ideas. If you produce intellectual work there are really only three ways to do that. Give it away for free and beg and provide services, accept some sort of feudal patronage (now reinvented on the internet) or have rights to what you make. The last one is the only thing that gives creators independence and compensates them directly, even if yes you have to settle subjective differences sometimes. Anyone who wants to abolish IP needs to tell me how a novelist earns a living without being reduced to some sort of begging.