Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey
"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.
|
It doesn't automatically mean that, but it makes sense in this case. And again, you're making the fundamental error by thinking IP rights are property. They're not, they're fundamentally different than property. Could they be in the future? Sure, but in the future an all powerful AI could also subjugate the human race, so what? They're not property now, in the reality in which most of us live.
Granting ownership forever of a piece of land is as artificial as anything else. As you say, laws are artificial, so we could as a society determine that all land reverts to the government after 10 years. Does it make sense to do that? No, but it also doesn't make sense to grant a monopoly on an idea or expression forever.
All you're doing is confusing the analogy that "IP is like property" with "IP is property". Its like Romeo saying that Julliet is the sun, but actually believing that she is literally the sun.