Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew H.
All property is an artificial construct. The house I "own" sits on a piece of land surrounded by invisible, magical boundaries. But the government has given me the ability to make people stay outside these "boundaries," and will, if necessary, give me the power to push people outside of these special lines. But if someone is standing just one foot outside of the "boundaries," well, suddenly I have no power to make them move.
In fact, in some states, you can even shoot people who cross these special lines, despite the fact that they exist nowhere in nature.
All property is an artificial, human construct.
|
I know that you're just taking that to absurd metaphysical extremes, but I think you're making my point for me.
Using the term "Intellectual Property" is just a semantic twist designed to confuse the ownership of ideas with that of physical property so that the same moral and ethical concepts can be applied across the board. Try to pull the same trick from the other direction (that physical property is really just an artificial concept) and you're obviously....well...just pulling the same trick.
As a practical matter, physical property and ideas are completely different things, and society's motivation for protecting them are also completely different. I'm having difficulty seeing how trying to blur the line between them is going to help further any discussion on the subject.