• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagree

The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagree


  • Total voters
    21
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Just to point out, IP and copyright laws divide libertarians. Not all libertarians are against IP and some support them. However, in my experience it is rather a minor issues among libertarians.



Such as?

Dunno, I left it kinda open-ended for a reason.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

In that case, I would be more concerned about what is wrong with our kids than about the economy. Maybe that's just me though.

In my mind, this is where the focus should lay, NOT believing it will cripple the economy.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

And he's a lawyer. He needs clients :p

I don't have the education to be good at that field. top IP or patent attorneys generally have a masters in pharmacy, engineering etc and a law degree. The guys in my class who had military backgrounds with aeronautics (one guy was a test pilot, another had the navy cross as a carrier fighter pilot over nam) were the guys the patent and IP firms grabbed up.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

In my mind, this is where the focus should lay, NOT believing it will cripple the economy.

Well, like i said in an earlier post, this whole discussion is moot if intellectual property law isn't actually being enforced properly. If it were, I imagine that it would help the economy somewhat - to what extent, i don't really know.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Intellectual property laws both help and hurt the economy. They help by incentivizing invention and creation and whatnot. They hurt by limiting the use those inventions and creations can be put to.

Intellectual property laws are basically just physical property laws that have been squeezed and distorted to try to make them apply to non-physical property. What we really need is a new type of property law that is built from the ground up to deal with intellectual property. It has massive differences from physical property. For physical goods there is a low initial cost of production, but a high marginal cost. Meaning that if I want to sell t-shirts, it's going to cost me a certain amount for every t-shirt that I sell somebody. So, I need to charge per t-shirt I sell. Physical property laws, where you pay per unit purchased, fit well with that- people are getting paid in proportion to their costs and around the time they incur those costs. Works pretty smoothly.

But with intellectual property there is a high initial cost, but virtually no marginal cost. Once I've made the song or invented the process or whatever, it costs me nothing for somebody else to use it. Physical property laws, where we charge per unit distributed, doesn't really align well with that situation. They have to incur lots of costs up from without compensation, and then the amount of compensation they eventually get may have no proportion to those costs. Where with physical property one bike has a fixed value to society, the value of intellectual property goes up the more people get access to it. We should aim for a policy that allows intellectual property to be distributed as widely as possible.

There are lots of different options. The corporations could finally get it's act together to provide more all-you-can-eat services like Netflix where you pay a reasonable fixed fee, that money gets split up amongst the content owners, and you are free to watch as much as you like. The government could set up a system where taxes pay the content creators and everybody is free to access the information. Individuals can force the change by pirating. I don't know the best way to go, but our current intellectual property laws don't fit intellectual property well. They create incentives to exclude people from consuming your product and that's just waste.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Getting back to the topic of the economic impact of copyrights and other IP rights, supporters often claim that it gives an incentive to innovate, and therefore leads to economic prosperity.

I am skeptical of this view, as history is replete with examples of innovation and great works of arts, music, innovation, etc. being produced despite the absence of strong copyright and IP laws. In addition, allowing the free flow of ideas actually leads to economic growth rather than hampering it by monopoly privileges.

For example, lets imagine how stifled human progress would be if someone copyrighted fire or the wheel.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Intellectual property laws both help and hurt the economy. They help by incentivizing invention and creation and whatnot. They hurt by limiting the use those inventions and creations can be put to.

Intellectual property laws are basically just physical property laws that have been squeezed and distorted to try to make them apply to non-physical property. What we really need is a new type of property law that is built from the ground up to deal with intellectual property. It has massive differences from physical property. For physical goods there is a low initial cost of production, but a high marginal cost. Meaning that if I want to sell t-shirts, it's going to cost me a certain amount for every t-shirt that I sell somebody. So, I need to charge per t-shirt I sell. Physical property laws, where you pay per unit purchased, fit well with that- people are getting paid in proportion to their costs and around the time they incur those costs. Works pretty smoothly.

But with intellectual property there is a high initial cost, but virtually no marginal cost. Once I've made the song or invented the process or whatever, it costs me nothing for somebody else to use it. Physical property laws, where we charge per unit distributed, doesn't really align well with that situation. They have to incur lots of costs up from without compensation, and then the amount of compensation they eventually get may have no proportion to those costs. Where with physical property one bike has a fixed value to society, the value of intellectual property goes up the more people get access to it. We should aim for a policy that allows intellectual property to be distributed as widely as possible.

There are lots of different options. The corporations could finally get it's act together to provide more all-you-can-eat services like Netflix where you pay a reasonable fixed fee, that money gets split up amongst the content owners, and you are free to watch as much as you like. The government could set up a system where taxes pay the content creators and everybody is free to access the information. Individuals can force the change by pirating. I don't know the best way to go, but our current intellectual property laws don't fit intellectual property well. They create incentives to exclude people from consuming your product and that's just waste.

Especially true in the digital age.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Getting back to the topic of the economic impact of copyrights and other IP rights, supporters often claim that it gives an incentive to innovate, and therefore leads to economic prosperity.

I am skeptical of this view, as history is replete with examples of innovation and great works of arts, music, innovation, etc. being produced despite the absence of strong copyright and IP laws. In addition, allowing the free flow of ideas actually leads to economic growth rather than hampering it by monopoly privileges.

For example, lets imagine how stifled human progress would be if someone copyrighted fire or the wheel.

No biggie-we would just buy the pirated versions from China
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

No biggie-we would just buy the pirated versions from China

Shouldn't we be paying China royalties on gunpowder?
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

It's somewhere in the middle so I'm not going to vote. In reality, digital piracy doesn't demonstrably harm anyone. The people who pirate are not going to buy the official versions in the first place, therefore there isn't a cent being lost because there isn't a cent to be made in the first place. Since digital media can be copied infinitely for virtually no cost, the copyright holders aren't out any money for the copies being sold. That's much different than if someone stole a truckload of CDs, it cost money to produce those CDs. It costs nothing to make millions of digital files and since it cost nothing to produce and not a red cent came out of the copyright holder's pocket and there was no money destined for said pocket, it's questionable how much validity groups like the RIAA and MPAA actually have. The only have power because they buy politicians.

I buy a ton of DVDs and I mean a ton. I've bought about 20 TV boxsets this week alone. Just came home from Walmart with another DVD today and my wife just ordered another batch online. I have well over 2000 commercial DVDs in my collection. That said though, if someone put out a movie I wanted to see at a price I thought was excessive, I'd have no problem whatsoever getting online and downloading the movie. None whatsoever. People need to *EARN* my business and that means producing a product I want to buy at a price I'm willing to spend. If they fail in either, I have no obligation to give them a red cent.

Too bad everyone today is so damn entitlement happy.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Shouldn't we be paying China royalties on gunpowder?

I thought Marco Polo bought the license!!

they have invented some really good table tennis rubber that the Tamasu Company (Butterfly) allegedly reverse engineered in the 70s!!
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Yes, but we are not talking about plagiarism and you are distorting the topic at hand. As I already noted, Long properly cites all his references in his works. I also use references in my writings. Enjoy your red herring.

You obviously don't even begin to comprehend what I just explained to you. Your link states that memorization implies ownership. That on ANY field would be akin to plagiarism, fraud etc. That the author begins to argue that a person owns IP because they memorized it is at best a retarded understanding of ownership and at worst blatant dishonesty.

Does freedom of speech mean anything to you or do you like to prohibit people from using, reproducing, and trading ideas that were supposedly original creation of the mind?

Freedom of speech has nothing to do with copyright lmao.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Shouldn't we be paying China royalties on gunpowder?

Arguments like this is why it's impossible to debate IP with a thief. They reduce their arguments to sheer absurdity.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Arguments like this is why it's impossible to debate IP with a thief. They reduce their arguments to sheer absurdity.

While the comment itself was a bit absurd, I think he brings up a valid point, one I mentioned before - the distinction between an original work and an unoriginal one is often subjective and artificial, as is often the difference between an invention and a discovery.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

While the comment itself was a bit absurd, I think he brings up a valid point, one I mentioned before - the distinction between an original work and an unoriginal one is often subjective and artificial, as is often the difference between an invention and a discovery.

Which point? Whether we should be paying China royalties for gun powder? You have got to be ****ting me. In case you aren't. Why stop there? Why not pay royalties to cro-magnon bones for fire? Wait wait - let's pay royalties to the San for our gratuitous use of their language in The God's Must Be Crazy? However that brings up the question - why is it that China isn't up in arms about the global use of gun powder? Maybe because it would be retarded to try and pay royalties to a country. It also has nothing to do with intellectual property which concerns the illegal use of an individual's work. When you reduce an argument to absurdity, expect to be ridiculed.
 
Last edited:
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Arguments like this is why it's impossible to debate IP with a thief. They reduce their arguments to sheer absurdity.

Whoosh.....

It is called a joke and not an actual argument. Lighten the **** up.
 
Last edited:
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

You obviously don't even begin to comprehend what I just explained to you. Your link states that memorization implies ownership. That on ANY field would be akin to plagiarism, fraud etc. That the author begins to argue that a person owns IP because they memorized it is at best a retarded understanding of ownership and at worst blatant dishonesty.

While I agree that it was a terrible example, you miss the bigger picture which is that copyrights is essentially ownership of the mind. Once those thoughts enter someone else's mind, you cannot own those, unless you own the person.

Freedom of speech has nothing to do with copyright lmao.

Copyrights limit the transmission of using, reproducing, and trading ideas, and hence a curtailment on freedom of speech and expression.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

While the comment itself was a bit absurd, I think he brings up a valid point, one I mentioned before - the distinction between an original work and an unoriginal one is often subjective and artificial, as is often the difference between an invention and a discovery.

I was being hyperbolic and facetious which escaped our dear friends Hatuey and TD. It was never meant to be an actual argument.

However, the "invention" of fire, the wheel, or gunpowder could be subject to copyright laws since at one point of time they were considered "original applications" of an individual. Afterall, wouldn't they be considered "original" works that could not be produced without the "owner's" consent?
 
Last edited:
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

I was being hyperbolic and facetious which escaped our dear friends Hatuey and TD. It was never meant to be an actual argument.

However, the "invention" of fire, the wheel, or gunpowder could be subject to copyright laws since at one point of time they were considered "original applications" of an individual. Afterall, wouldn't they be considered "original" works that could not be produced without the "owner's" consent?

Yeah, I figured it was a joke.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Can't see how rent seeking makes the economy better, in fact the opposite tends to be true.

I don't entirely agree that IP law necessarily = rent-seeking, although when put into practice, many features of modern American IP law do indeed promote rent-seeking.

Like I've been saying throughout the thread, intellectual property isn't a black-and-white issue for me.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

In many cases this is true, but not necessarily so. Either way, the distinction between an original and unoriginal work is often subjective and artificial, which is why I agree with some Libertarian arguments against IP law as it exists today.

But I still think people who put that much hard work and effort into the creation of a work are entitled to some sort of protection.

Some here like to distort my opinion on the subject, but I too think that someone is entitled to compensation for their work, whether it IP or other.
The problem I have is that the law gives more privileged benefits to IP producers, than is necessary.

With physical property, if you abandon it, after a certain amount of time, you lose the rights to it.
There is an implicit duty to maintain physical property, but none for IP.

That should be rectified, among other things.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

I don't entirely agree that IP law necessarily = rent-seeking, although when put into practice, many features of modern American IP law do indeed promote rent-seeking.

Like I've been saying throughout the thread, intellectual property isn't a black-and-white issue for me.

It isn't for me too.
But my answer was purely based on the OPs question.
If all people were to observe current IP law, yes it promotes rent seeking.

Which is economically negative.
 
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

I don't entirely agree that IP law necessarily = rent-seeking, although when put into practice, many features of modern American IP law do indeed promote rent-seeking.

Like I've been saying throughout the thread, intellectual property isn't a black-and-white issue for me.

No offense, but you have not fully articulated yourself on the gray areas. Granted it may not be a black and white area, but it would be best if you discussed why it is not a black and white issue, instead of simply saying so. I don't mean this as an attack, but interested your opinions - either formulated or in the process of formulation.
 
Last edited:
Re: The economy would be better if more people respected copyright law. Agree/disagr

Some here like to distort my opinion on the subject, but I too think that someone is entitled to compensation for their work, whether it IP or other.
The problem I have is that the law gives more privileged benefits to IP producers, than is necessary.

With physical property, if you abandon it, after a certain amount of time, you lose the rights to it.
There is an implicit duty to maintain physical property, but none for IP.

That should be rectified, among other things.

In addition, IP is not subject to the ordinary economic of laws of scarcity. The transmission of ideas does not diminish other people's physical property (i.e. land, labor, capital).

The scarcity problem simply does not exist for intellectual property and therefore is not necessarily subject to the laws of private property.
 
Back
Top Bottom