[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by gmw

Copyright doesn't protect IP because it is the IP. Copyright is what you can buy or sell or licence.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Copyright is nothing more than the legal title for the idea that you have a monopoly on the right to monetize in any way you like the work you did to express an idea in a specific form.

For example, copyright legally protects the right of JK Rowling to monetize the Harry Potter series but it is not the Harry Potter series itself.

Originally Posted by gmw

It is the law that defines what is property, and indirectly suggests its value (because law limits what you can do with your property). At one stage it was possible for people to be property! Arguing what is workable under law is a bit pointless, because the law made the definition in the first place. (You think you own the land on which your house sits, but that's only true within the constraints defined by law.)

If I have a rock in my hand and I don't want you to have it, it doesn't matter what the law says that rock is or what its value is. It is possible that I can stop you from taking that rock. (whether or not I achieve that end is beside the point, it is possible for me to attempt to do so)

Originally Posted by gmw

Land isn't the same thing as water, isn't the same thing as farm produce and isn't the same thing as copyright. They can all be property, but they all have their own peculiarities and so differences in the way they are treated under law. Changing the law can change what is property, or can change what property is worth.

If I have an idea in my mind and I express it to you, it doesn't matter what the law says that idea is or what its value is. It is not actually possible for me to stop you from taking that idea and doing whatever you want with it. You could take that idea and do whatever you want with it without me even knowing you had done so until after you did so. Therefore it is only possible that I could seek revenge on you for doing so by, for example, killing you.

Changing the law doesn't change that.

Originally Posted by gmw

If you want to limit your conversation to copyright you must stop using phrases like "steal your idea".

I chose the word "steal" specifically to highlight the fact that idea's are not the same as physical objects and therefore should not be treated the same. I guess I was being too subtle.

Originally Posted by gmw

Protecting ideas is very difficult, of course, but I can certainly protect copyright by strength of arms. I simply storm your house and burn all copies of the work you are not entitled to have, and take recompense for your theft in whatever form I like, because I have strength of arms.

In this example you have not actually stopped me from anything. You have punished me after the fact for having done so. That is a distinct difference.

Originally Posted by gmw

Laws are used to protect property, they don't care much whether it's IP or PP. (Of course differences exist in the way the laws can be enforced.) When we say the law protects property it is indeed partly by the threat of strength of arms, because generally the government has the strongest arms in the area, although few will put them to the test.

Yes laws are used to protect property. Never claimed otherwise.

Laws are in fact the only thing that give you some very limited protection for IP. That is not the case with physical property and that's a very important distinction.

Originally Posted by gmw

Your distinction about protecting PP by force of arms is attractive, but it doesn't really hold up because I can choose to protect anything I like by force of arms - even ideas. That would be a worry because it is possible for two people to have the same idea, so I might invade a neighbouring country for having stolen our idea, when in fact they might have come up with it independently.

You can't physically protect your idea via force of arms. At least not unless you are willing to kill every other person on Earth so as to ensure no one "steals" it. All you can do is either
A: never express the idea. In this instance you stop anyone from "stealing" the idea but you still don't stop them from coming up with the same idea. Or;
B: punish those you think "stole" your idea after the fact.

If you disagree feel free to explain how, without killing me immediately after expressing your idea to me, you could physically stop me from silently walking away and using that idea for whatever I want? I grant you that you could sue me in court but that wouldn't actually stop me unless I decided to comply. You could destroy anything I use your idea to create or you could do all sorts of things after the fact but none of that physically stops me from doing it in the first place. It only, possibly, redresses the issue after the fact.