View Single Post
Old 12-31-2013, 10:27 AM   #62
tubemonkey
monkey on the fringe
tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
tubemonkey's Avatar
 
Posts: 45,767
Karma: 158733736
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Seattle Metro
Device: Moto E6, Echo Show
Quote:
Originally Posted by latepaul View Post
The second is the idea that because they are both fruits of a person's labour that physical and intellectual property are the same. Clearly this is not true. Physical property has characteristics that intellectual property does not. You can lock your possessions away. They can only be in one place at a time and usually only used by one (or a few) people at a time. Possession of a physical object means something different to possession of an idea or the expression of an idea. It follows therefore that the laws we enact need to reflect those differences even if our aim is to make the outcomes similar (point one) - and the jury's very much out on whether this is our collective aim.
"Clearly this is not true."

It's only not true because society deems it that way. It could just as easily be the opposite.

And just because the characteristics are different; by no means does that automatically mean that ownership of one form of property should cease after an artificial time period and that of another form of property should not.
tubemonkey is offline   Reply With Quote