Villian or hero?

[SpontaneousOrder]

But did they have a choice?

That's irrelevant anyway. What somebody does with their intellectual property is up to them, which is the point. If some starving musician wants to produce an album and give it away for free in the hope of promoting themselves, that's fine by me. The question is if the starving musician decides they'd really like some money for food, then why do you or anyone have the right to take their work without contributing?

There is no such thing! They aren't 'taking' anything, as I've pointed out several times already.

[doodab]

And what doe's 'belong' mean?

Common sense really leaves the building when you get going doesn't it....

[doodab]

There is no such thing!

You do have a habit of asserting abject nonsense. In the real world there clearly is such a thing as intellectual property, you might deny it's existence as a physical thing but it exists as an entity that can be traded and frequently is. You may as well argue there is no such thing as a futures contract.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Common sense really leaves the building when you get going doesn't it....

Rofl. You're the king of begging the question and you accuse me of lacking common sense.

The concept of ownership only exists because of scarcity. It is impossible (or I should say doesn't make sense) to own something that isn't scarce. How can you own a right? You can possess a right, but you cannot own it. It's ridiculous.

[SpontaneousOrder]

You do have a habit of asserting abject nonsense. In the real world there clearly is such a thing as intellectual property, you might deny it's existence as a physical thing but it exists as an entity that can be traded and frequently is. You may as well argue there is no such thing as a futures contract.

No. Fail. Get a clue! A futures contract may exist because two or more people form a contract. Intellectual property cannot exist because it is a contradiction. A futures contract is not a contradiction.

You'll be telling me next that there would be such a thing as a square circle of the law said so.

[doodab]

Rofl. You're the king of begging the question and you accuse me of lacking common sense.

The concept of ownership only exists because of scarcity. It is impossible (or I should say doesn't make sense) to own something that isn't scarce. How can you own a right? You can possess a right, but you cannot own it. It's ridiculous.

You're taking one of the standard approaches of armchair philosophers everywhere when they're losing an argument and asking for definitions of everyday words. It's quite obvious that a language cannot be completely defined without reference to reality.

It's also a bit rich of you to accuse me of begging the question when your premises are in general conclusions drawn from a seemingly delusional view of the world. You simply state without any sort of argument that "intellectual property doesn't exist" or "the concept of property only exists because resources are scarce" when such statements are clearly contentious and out of step with the actual meaning of the words in every day usage.

One can own anything. It needn't be scarce. People own cars, yet thousands are scrapped every year, hardly something you'd do with a "scarce resource".

[doodab]

No. Fail. Get a clue! A futures contract may exist because two or more people form a contract. Intellectual property cannot exist because it is a contradiction. A futures contract is not a contradiction.

Intellectual property can exist for exactly the same reason. As long as two parties agree to exchange it for money it exists, on some level.

You'll be telling me next that there would be such a thing as a square circle of the law said so.

Feel free to write that again in English

Your fundamental problem is that the entire world disagrees with you on the subject of the existence intellectual property. You may as well deny the existence of the sky, you'll look no more of a fool.

[Batcher]

There is no such thing! They aren't 'taking' anything, as I've pointed out several times already.

That's nonsense. Of course it exists.

The government have a department dealing with IP Intellectual Property Office - Welcome to the Intellectual Property Office

There is now an IP court https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rc...terprise-court

[darmstadt]

BBC News - Kim Dotcom: On the road with Hollywood's biggest enemy

Is Kim Dotcom a villian or a hero?

<AustinPowersMode>

You forgot 'Fat German Bastard'

</AustinPowersMode>

[SpontaneousOrder]

That's nonsense. Of course it exists.

The government have a department dealing with IP Intellectual Property Office - Welcome to the Intellectual Property Office

There is now an IP court https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rc...terprise-court

ZOMG. Same question to you then - if the government had a department dealing with square circles, would that mean that there can be such a thing as a square circle?