Re: Historical comparisons

On 11 Mar 2006 17:31:28 -0800, "William Mook"
<william.mook@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I don't buy the argument that letting someone develop and market a
resource no one knew existed before they came along is depriving anyone
of anything!.

But in fact, it just _is_, unless no one else wants to use it. The
facts are not altered by whether or not you choose to know them.

If I invent a labor saving device I own the intellectual property
associated with the device.

That is merely an arbitrary legal construct with no foundation in
human rights. Zero.

I can apply for letter of Patent for it,
and deny others from making it for a period of time. This is
recognized as a good thing, as it spurs innovation.

Some people claim it is a good thing, but it actually is not. And it
is very doubtful that it still spurs innovation, if it ever did.

No one is denied,
especially the public, by granting these patent rights.

?? Yes, of course they are. Google "Elisha Gray" and educate
yourself, at least a little bit. Your claim is false and absurd.

In fact the
public is well served because new ideas and products are brought to
market, enriching everyone.

Nonsense. New ideas and products that _don't_ get patent protection
are also brought to market, enriching everyone. There is no credible
evidence that patents increase the flow of new products and ideas into
the market. None.

In the same way, if I discover a new resource I should own the resource
associated with that discovery.

?? _Why_ should you? You haven't produced it. By what right do you
extinguish everyone else's right to discover and use that resource?
Answer: no right whatever.

I should be able to have the right to
deny others development of that resource for a period of time.

Why? That is a claim lacking any foundation in economics or human
rights. You are making claim after claim for your egregious
privileges, and offering not one jot of justification for them.

This is a good thing as it spurs innovation.

No, it most certainly does not, and it is a bad thing.

No one is denied especially the
public by granting these property rights.

Garbage. Anyone who waants to use the reosurce is deprived of the
opportunity to do so. You are just making a series of bald,
unsupported claims, and denying self-evident and indisputable facts.
That is the inevitable pattern followed by all apologists for
privilege.

In fact the public is well
served because new resources are brought to market enriching everyone.

More garbage. How does empowering someone to block resource
development spur resource development? Answer: it doesn't.

You're stretching trying to maintain a point that cannot be maintained.

ROTFL!! You have yet to refute one single statement I have made,
while I have refuted pretty much every claim you have made.

Privilege examples you cite clearly all require some sort of limit -
typically imposed by a governing agency - that is unnatural to the free
operation of marekts and denies people of rights.

Private property in natural resources is unnatural to the operation of
free markets, as is private property in publicly known ideas.

Slavery requires
slaves be denied their rights by law, which is far more costly than any
benefit slavery allows.

That is actually more true of private property in natural resources.
You just don't understand why, because you don't know enough history
or economics.

Without the law people wouldn't stand for
slavery's limitations - and even with the law they don't for long!

Garbage. Slavery existed in most pre-legal societies. Aristotle
argued that it was natural, and it was universally accepted until a
few centuries ago.

Taxi cab medallions are artificially restricted to maintain high
prices. If the government eliminated this restriction in numbers of
medallions and let anyone who passed a test and filed the right reports
and paid a fee, to operate a cab, the privilege would go away and the
market would rule.

Right. And the same goes for IP and natural resources.

-- Roy L
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Historical comparisons
    ... Patent rights are just a human construct you say. ... Patent rights cause people to create huge amounts of wealth. ... benefits from a resource, it doesn't exist economically. ... The papers I cited on private enterprise and private property ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: SLipstream admin credentials
    ... Why does the System account not work for you? ... This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. ... SMS 2003 Resource Page: ...
    (microsoft.public.sms.swdist)
  • Re: There must be a tool for this?
    ... when you grant a user's identity the rights to access a file ... If you gave rights to individual identities vs. groups at any network ... resource, you'll need to go to the network resource to get the available ... > my AD database to see all the permissions that have been assigned to ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Historical comparisons
    ... by granting these patent rights. ... if I discover a new resource I should own the resource ... served because new resources are brought to market enriching everyone. ... slaves be denied their rights by law, which is far more costly than any ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: D gets it right
    ... financial damage from resource leaks in the Java-based internet banking site ... Perhaps that means I have an agenda - fair enough. ... the accusation that I have a weak grasp of the facts is unfounded. ...
    (comp.programming)
Loading