The end of copyright and patent is where we should be headed - page 3.

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Quote from: CIYAM on March 06, 2015, 02:18:09 PM

Quote from: jaysabi on March 06, 2015, 02:16:32 PM

If you take without permission, you initiate force against that person, and the initiation of force is morally wrong. A system to prevent or allow for punishment of people who would take through force is appropriate.

I think you need to "reverse" your statement. If someone doesn't want anyone to copy their work then simply don't publish it.

No two countries are ever going to have the "same laws" in regards to any "intellectual property" therefore it simply doesn't work in the modern world (for example the US seems to now extend copyright *forever* whereas most other countries limit it).

Obviously. It is your fault if you expose your art to talentless thugs.

Roll Eyes

jaysabi

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1115

★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!

Quote from: Beliathon on March 06, 2015, 02:34:17 PM

Quote from: jaysabi on March 06, 2015, 02:16:32 PM

I care about property rights. I won't support a system that doesn't allow people to keep the fruits of their labor

So you don't support capitalism, I take it? After all, it's a fact that the overwhelming majority of workers are not allowed to keep the fruits of their labor. They are expected to accept a tiny fraction of the profits generated by that labor, or fuck off and starve.

Quote from: jaysabi on March 06, 2015, 02:16:32 PM

It's up to the individual to decide whether he wants to forfeit his property rights

Reality check, it's up to whomever commands the monopoly on coercive force and violence. In this case, the nation state. You have no rights, you have privileges granted to you by your masters. These can be revoked at any time. If you don't believe me, google internment camps WW2.

I support capitalism, but it seems you don't. It seems to me you're conflating voluntary employment with forced employment. If you want to keep the fruits of your entire labor, go into business for yourself. What you do by agreeing to take a job is sell your labor to someone who pays you for it, so you have already entered an agreement not to own the product of your labor. Ostensibly, whoever is paying you for it can make more off your labor than you could if you were to try to sell whatever it is you were making yourself. That's how you both benefit from an employment arrangement. There's nothing forced about that, and these voluntary employment arrangements have nothing to do with the state's monopoly on force.

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Can someone open source her wife or his husband and children? Put them on kickstarter for crowd sourcing.

Copyright was not a big deal before because taking a real concept from somebody was physically hard. You could not simply google image photos and then claim as yours like those people

But keeping something secret for fear of being stolen or copied is older the concept of copyrighting. Way older.

We should find a way to make copyright laws evolve with our times, maybe what maidsafe is doing, instead of destroying everything because of abuse of the law.

Most people who call for the demise of any form of property law are not creative minds or artists, so they don't really care one way or the other.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: jaysabi on March 06, 2015, 03:11:05 PM

Either you own the fruit of your labor or you don't. Your copyright-less system does not recognize the product of your work as your property. That's not a just system.

But this "non-system" has been working in countries such as China for many, many years.

Maybe time to "re-think" your idea of the system?

jaysabi

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1115

★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!

Quote from: CIYAM on March 06, 2015, 02:18:09 PM

Quote from: jaysabi on March 06, 2015, 02:16:32 PM

If you take without permission, you initiate force against that person, and the initiation of force is morally wrong. A system to prevent or allow for punishment of people who would take through force is appropriate.

I think you need to "reverse" your statement. If someone doesn't want anyone to copy their work then simply don't publish it.

What does "reverse your statement" mean?

The point of working in a field is to make a living, and publication is necessary to monetize your work if you make "artistic" products. Publication does not forfeit your property rights.

Either you own the fruit of your labor or you don't. Your copyright-less system does not recognize the product of your work as your property. That's not a just system.

Beliathon

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 1000

https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU

Quote from: BitMos on March 06, 2015, 02:13:08 PM

About entertainers, how could they live without income, and thus produce the entertainment I like?

Entertainers survived and thrived for thousands of years before the word "copyright" was ever uttered.

Quote from: jaysabi on March 06, 2015, 02:16:32 PM

I care about property rights. I won't support a system that doesn't allow people to keep the fruits of their labor

So you don't support capitalism, I take it? After all, it's a fact that the overwhelming majority of workers are not allowed to keep the fruits of their labor. They are expected to accept a tiny fraction of the profits generated by that labor, or fuck off and starve.

Quote from: jaysabi on March 06, 2015, 02:16:32 PM

It's up to the individual to decide whether he wants to forfeit his property rights

Reality check, it's up to whomever commands the monopoly on coercive force and violence. In this case, the nation state. You have no rights, you have privileges granted to you by your masters. These can be revoked at any time. If you don't believe me, google internment camps WW2.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: jaysabi on March 06, 2015, 02:16:32 PM

If you take without permission, you initiate force against that person, and the initiation of force is morally wrong. A system to prevent or allow for punishment of people who would take through force is appropriate.

I think you need to "reverse" your statement. If someone doesn't want anyone to copy their work then simply don't publish it.

No two countries are ever going to have the "same laws" in regards to any "intellectual property" therefore it simply doesn't work in the modern world (for example the US seems to now extend copyright *forever* whereas most other countries limit it).

jaysabi

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1115

★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!

I care about property rights. I won't support a system that doesn't allow people to keep the fruits of their labor or won't protect their work as their property. It's up to the individual to decide whether he wants to forfeit his property rights, not the rest of society to force him to give his work away because you don't want to pay for his book. If you take without permission, you initiate force against that person, and the initiation of force is morally wrong. A system to prevent or allow for punishment of people who would take through force is appropriate.

BitMos

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 123

"PLEASE SCULPT YOUR SHIT BEFORE THROWING. Thank U"

Quote from: Beliathon on March 06, 2015, 02:04:44 PM

Quote from: BitMos on March 06, 2015, 12:12:22 PM

Please, understand that I have decided to appropriate myself the rights granted by copyrights, in the attribution to myself to the patent of fire. yes, simply that. following this dire legal fact, all of you will have to pay me 1% of your income (because today I am nice, but tomorrow it could be 20%), I hope you will agree, otherwise I would come with the "cops" to take your asset directly (it would be less nice).

This guy gets it.

Quote from: BitMos on March 06, 2015, 12:12:22 PM

the best and most efficient way to finish copyright holder is to not buy from them. it's a pause, but to breath you have to pause. Cheesy

. think of that like the winter of growth.

I'd so go one step further, once you have the information they are trying to own, distribute it as freely and widely as you can. No mercy for any profit margins backed by (state or not) violence.

thank you, what a compliment, but I could be a girl, or an AI... who knows...

About entertainers, how could they live without income, and thus produce the entertainment I like? winter is harsh.

the people that are very funny are those having copyrights on weapons... hoooww childish.

Beliathon

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 1000

https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU

Quote from: BitMos on March 06, 2015, 12:12:22 PM

Please, understand that I have decided to appropriate myself the rights granted by copyrights, in the attribution to myself to the patent of fire. yes, simply that. following this dire legal fact, all of you will have to pay me 1% of your income (because today I am nice, but tomorrow it could be 20%), I hope you will agree, otherwise I would come with the "cops" to take your asset directly (it would be less nice).

This guy gets it.

Quote from: BitMos on March 06, 2015, 12:12:22 PM

the best and most efficient way to finish copyright holder is to not buy from them. it's a pause, but to breath you have to pause. Cheesy

. think of that like the winter of growth.

I'd so go one step further, once you have the information they are trying to own, distribute it as freely and widely as you can. No mercy for any profit margins backed by (state or not) violence.

BitMos

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 123

"PLEASE SCULPT YOUR SHIT BEFORE THROWING. Thank U"

Quote from: jaysabi on March 06, 2015, 01:55:02 PM

I believe copyrights have their place for people who create their work (be it a movie, song, book, etc.) and don't wish for you to consume it without compensation. Getting rid of copyrights gets rid of the legal protection of their property. Crowd funding is great for any artist who wants to go that route. I support copyright protections for those who don't.

reverse my statement and you will see it's true too.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Hollywood has managed to survive and "thrive" in the digital age by just changing their model (so they make all their profits in the first week).

If they can work it out then I think others can also.

jaysabi

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1115

★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!

I believe copyrights have their place for people who create their work (be it a movie, song, book, etc.) and don't wish for you to consume it without compensation. Getting rid of copyrights gets rid of the legal protection of their property. Crowd funding is great for any artist who wants to go that route. I support copyright protections for those who don't.

BitMos

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 123

"PLEASE SCULPT YOUR SHIT BEFORE THROWING. Thank U"

Quote from: thompete on March 06, 2015, 11:59:34 AM

After 3 pages, sorry If I am repeating this. But it is true , that COpyright and patents are a hindrance for growth. I mean, the main aim of the world is to move forward and grow, and using on innovations from other people. If you copyright something, then that basically hinders that growth.
Here is also an interesting video/article: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/b/6888f36d-5487-4bfb-b670-32c581f1d2ce
Can't find the similar article I read.

Please, understand that I have decided to appropriate myself the rights granted by copyrights, in the attribution to myself to the patent of fire. yes, simply that. following this dire legal fact, all of you will have to pay me 1% of your income (because today I am nice, but tomorrow it could be 20%), I hope you will agree, otherwise I would come with the "cops" to take your asset directly (it would be less nice).

the best and most efficient way to finish copyright holder is to not buy from them. it's a pause, but to breath you have to pause. Cheesy

. think of that like the winter of growth.

thompete

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

After 3 pages, sorry If I am repeating this. But it is true , that COpyright and patents are a hindrance for growth. I mean, the main aim of the world is to move forward and grow, and using on innovations from other people. If you copyright something, then that basically hinders that growth.
Here is also an interesting video/article: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/b/6888f36d-5487-4bfb-b670-32c581f1d2ce
Can't find the similar article I read.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: NUFCrichard on March 06, 2015, 10:49:41 AM

Look at what has happened to hollywood since people started pirating the films constantly. There has hardly been an original film made there in the last 10 years!

Actually all the evidence about Hollywood shows that they are making more money than *ever before* (and most of the new films make that money within their first week now). There is a good TED Talk about this specific thing (I suggest watching it).

Also if you look at the film Interstellar it was not only a great film but involved some incredible R&D with the some of the key special effects being actually based upon correctly modelled physics.

The film will have been "pirated" all over the place already but they have already made their profits (so it really isn't relevant to their "bottom line").

Basically Hollywood has "solved" the problem with the idea of getting people to go to cinemas in particular (and wanting to see the "new release" there).

So although they keep "crying poor" they have worked out how to re-invent themselves in the 21st century (maybe big Pharma needs some lessons).

NUFCrichard

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1003

Why would companies spend money on R&D without the protection that a patent offers. They pour money into testing and developing a product only to be usurped by larger companies later.
The copyright isn't so important to me, but I work in Biotechnology and clinical trials and product development takes a very long time and costs lots of money. Usually big Pharma comes in and buys out the small companies soon after they get drug approval, but without a patent they wouldn't really need to, they could employ 1 or 2 of the key developers and they would have all of the information they need to make the product themselves.

Soon enough no one would do R&D and progress would slow significantly. Look at what has happened to hollywood since people started pirating the films constantly. There has hardly been an original film made there in the last 10 years!

runpaint

sr. member

Activity: 518

Merit: 250

Quote from: ?? on ??

Holy fuck i had to put the dumbfck runpaint on ignore.

That's the best way to preserve your irrational beliefs, since you can't answer my points.

Quote from: seriouscoin on December 08, 2013, 10:15:21 PM

If i could have 1 BTC for every thread like this when the price crashes, i would be banging Kimdarshian and driving a Maserati.

Those greedy capitalists who see the common people as pigs to be slaughtered for their own profits...

Quote from: seriouscoin on December 06, 2013, 05:07:01 PM

This is why we call the noobs pigs,.... and pigs are always slaughtered.

The same greedy grubbing capitalists with their lust for gold...

Quote from: seriouscoin on November 28, 2013, 07:34:41 AM

We will be on par with GOLD soon!

While so many people starve, these privileged few sit on mountains of wealth which is more than any man could ever need...

Quote from: seriouscoin on November 28, 2013, 07:19:25 AM

I did transfer of five figures and my bank asked me all kind of questions..... some even privacy related.

They laugh and count their money, salivating over the prospect of getting even MORE money...

Quote from: seriouscoin on November 26, 2013, 04:22:09 AM

LOL you know eventually btc will be over $10k right? Who would buy one coin? I'm sure ppl will buy mBTC

They control the means of production...

Quote from: seriouscoin on August 01, 2013, 01:02:11 AM

I have a BFL SC 60GH/s IN HAND for sale.

Asking $10,000 cash. I dont consider SHIPPING right now.

But you're right, all kinds of greedy assholes showed up in 2013. One guy hadn't posted here since June 2012, and he showed up out of nowhere, over a year later, and his first post was an offer to sell a mining rig for $10,000. ^

I'm talking about the serious capitalist assholes who were drunk with money, and called everyone else idiots for selling at $800.

Quote from: seriouscoin on December 09, 2013, 09:43:23 PM

Booom.... i just took that 950 wall down!

FCK TA.... money talks bs walks!

And then of course after the price came back down, now he hates capitalism and money. Because he can't afford to pay for as much sex as he used to.

Quote from: seriouscoin on January 30, 2014, 03:33:31 AM

blow couple btc and you can get 5 girls for the night

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: BADecker on March 06, 2015, 03:51:21 AM

Anyone who wants to get rid of patenting and copyrighting is only attempting to shoot himself in the foot. Why? Because when we don't have patenting and copyrighting in place any longer, companies will spring up that will make sure that copies CAN'T be made without proper payment... through various forms of encryption and hardware.

As effectively copyright and patent have never applied to China by your reasoning no-one would have any pirate software here because it would have already been protected.

Hmm... seems not to be the case. Wink

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1368

Attempting to limit one from how he wishes to distribute his private property is an attempt at socializing, which is really taking away freedom.

Anyone who wants to get rid of patenting and copyrighting is only attempting to shoot himself in the foot. Why? Because when we don't have patenting and copyrighting in place any longer, companies will spring up that will make sure that copies CAN'T be made without proper payment... through various forms of encryption and hardware.

As long as people keep on trusting an outdated patent/copyright system, they won't try to limit copying in more effective ways. But if the patent/copyright system is removed, people will do what they must to protect their property, which includes their sales. And what they do will be way beyond anything in the present encryption field.

Now, maybe that is the thing you are really after. If it is, I don't blame you. The patent/copyright system isn't working very well anyway.

EDIT: Would you buy a car with a sealed engine, so that private engine technology would be protected? Many people would.

Topic: The end of copyright and patent is where we should be headed - page 3. (Read 3958 times)