On Sunday 15 October 2006 22:48, M Harris wrote:
No. I have completely bought into the concept that intellectual property does not exist. No one develops anything in a vacuum. All new information is derived from existing knowledge,
So the basis of M Harris's argument is that all inventions are based on some prior inventions, and therefore intellectual property can not exist. M Harris forgets that society as a whole established and encoded into law that there is such a thing as intellectual property and that it can be bought, sold, traded for a time certain, after which it becomes public property. Therefore it matters not a whit what M. Harris has "bought into". His views are simply at odds with established law, and historical practices since time immemorial. But even more basic than just being at odds with the entire human race, (as if that were not enough), his argument is simply wrong on its face. The fact the prior inventions are incorporated into new inventions (after the expiration of patents, etc.) has nothing at all to do with either the rights of the inventor or the value of his invention. Both of these (rights and value) are recognized by society, and, as a reward, the inventor is given a time certain in which to bring them to market, and after which, anyone else may do so at will. The inventions upon which any current invention is based were also given this protection, even though they in turn depended on prior inventions. And so on, all the way from the automobile back to the invention of the wheel. The only thing that has changed is that the whole process has become more civilized over the last 300 years. One may argue it has gone too far, and I would agree, but that is but a temporal imbalance in the laws, which the market will undo one way or another over time. -- _____________________________________ John Andersen