This assumes the philosophy of intellectual property is compatible with the world of cryptocurrency with a focus on anonymity.
Pure anarchy tends not to work well.
Copycoins would have a choice:
1. Licence DarkSend, benefit from the hard work being done for them and existing market recognition.
2. Use DarkSend unlicenced, good luck getting any serious investment due to the blatant illegality of it
3. Come up with something themselves, ie hard work
Works just fine actually. You going to have the state enforce this IP model? I don't think so.
Give me some examples of functional anarchistic societies that involve more than three hippies living in a commune...
I'm no fan of "the state", but if we can play the system to our advantage at close to zero cost then why not?
In your anarchistic utopia the only currencies that matter will be ammo, water, food, medicine... same as it ever was.
It's the pockets of Anarchy in every society that keeps it moving, nothing could be done without it.... but there's plenty of places you can go on the internet and learn about how wrong you are there. The point is, crypto is the last place intellectual property will be respected... because it only exists in the minds of statists.
I meant anarchy on a country wide scale. I agree with you that it's the free-thinkers from whence springs progress...
About the crypto "community" not caring about IP, I also agree, but we need to stop preaching to the choir and target everyone else, deal with society at large. It is in our own interests to do so. There's no reason we can't use the existing system for our own gain. We've paid for it...
There are unintended consequences with trying to claim IPR.
property rights denote ownership. Ownership denotes an owner. Owners can withhold their permission and their rights can be sold or passed on to third parties.
To defend IPR you need to levy the threat of legal action. That implies you need to be capable of retaining lawyers to pursue infringements, even on a global basis. That opens up the potential to open court, disclosure and distraction. It also opens up the potential to lose IPR rights in the case of losing a court case and not being able to pay costs.
If you assert IPR, that means you become a point for failure in a decentralised environment. If freedom from government intervention is sought, claiming to own the keys to the system opens up owners to cease and desist orders. The system can be switched off.
I would leave the issue of IRP off the agenda.
Lets talk about moon landings and setting up space 1999 colonies instead.