Um, no. It's objective fact. Whether it's a video game or R&D on drugs or semiconductors, it does in fact require the expending of limited resources. Are you for real? This stuff doesn't pop into existence out of thin air.
>This is what about Goebbels said, "the bigger the lie, the easier it is to believe in."
Ah yes going the Nazi quote angle, always the sign of someone who is definitely not a crackpot.
>1. Set up a machine that will "destroy" the IP value of something by copying it.
>2. Make it do so a billion times, and watch if the company whose IP being "infringed" goes bankrupt.
Did you, you know, actually READ anything I wrote, including the very first sentence that you yourself quoted? Because what you just described is information replication, which as I wrote in, again, that very sentence you quoted, is effectively free. It does not cover the step 0 of GENERATING that information to be copied in the first place. That's the problem part, which IP attempts to solve by hacking on synthetic limits on the unlimited part of the equation to handle allocation to the limited part.
>What was the last "big thing" an American company ever came with?
Basically the entire semiconductor and software industry? Most modern medicines? Much of modern genetic technology? Reusable rockets? Like, are you for real?
>and it was more than 60 years ago, when no monstrous IP protection regime was in place.
Uh, yeah when it comes to patents yes, IP is about the same as it was 60 years ago, beyond the Republicans continually trying to cut the budget of the PTO. That's part of the problem in fact.
I keep wondering if you're being sarcastic or engaging in satire here yet you seem to be entirely serious, but it's utter nonsense stuff.
> Um, no. It's objective fact. Whether it's a video game or R&D on drugs or semiconductors, it does in fact require the expending of limited resources. Are you for real? This stuff doesn't pop into existence out of thin air.
You can do a lot of normally valueless things for money, if somebody gives them to you for that, whether by legal compulsion or own volition. Not denying that. The question is whether giving money for that is a rational thing to do.
>It does not cover the step 0 of GENERATING that information to be copied in the first place.
I put that example exactly to demonstrate that it does not influence whether the person/business in question has his capacity "of GENERATING that information" diminished.
No, that person or a business is 100% capable continuing doing so in the same capacity.
The capacity "of GENERATING that information" gets diminished if it gets regulatory limited though IP monopoly (I copyrighted this mathematic formula/program, thus nobody else can use it in their mathematic formulas/computer programs)
China for example has its own non-insignificant pharmaceutical industry making original drugs, low profile semiconductor industry which nevertheless makes own developments, and gigantic videogame companies all with close to none IP enforcement.
Um, no. It's objective fact. Whether it's a video game or R&D on drugs or semiconductors, it does in fact require the expending of limited resources. Are you for real? This stuff doesn't pop into existence out of thin air.
>This is what about Goebbels said, "the bigger the lie, the easier it is to believe in."
Ah yes going the Nazi quote angle, always the sign of someone who is definitely not a crackpot.
>1. Set up a machine that will "destroy" the IP value of something by copying it.
>2. Make it do so a billion times, and watch if the company whose IP being "infringed" goes bankrupt.
Did you, you know, actually READ anything I wrote, including the very first sentence that you yourself quoted? Because what you just described is information replication, which as I wrote in, again, that very sentence you quoted, is effectively free. It does not cover the step 0 of GENERATING that information to be copied in the first place. That's the problem part, which IP attempts to solve by hacking on synthetic limits on the unlimited part of the equation to handle allocation to the limited part.
>What was the last "big thing" an American company ever came with?
Basically the entire semiconductor and software industry? Most modern medicines? Much of modern genetic technology? Reusable rockets? Like, are you for real?
>and it was more than 60 years ago, when no monstrous IP protection regime was in place.
Uh, yeah when it comes to patents yes, IP is about the same as it was 60 years ago, beyond the Republicans continually trying to cut the budget of the PTO. That's part of the problem in fact.
I keep wondering if you're being sarcastic or engaging in satire here yet you seem to be entirely serious, but it's utter nonsense stuff.