Subject:
|
Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Jan 2000 19:25:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1938 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > Except possibly, oh, I don't know, how about those people who could
> > actually benefit from the invention? You know, just like roads should
> > be financed by the users.
>
> So let me see here, what you're proposing is that I go out and invent
> something, someone else steals my idea, gets it to market first, and
> makes a pile from the users, and I don't even get my R&D costs covered?
Wouldn't you then have legal recourse to sue (or whatever) that person for
stealing? After all, it's your goods he's profiting from, without your
permission, neh?
<snippage>
> I see ideas as property of the inventor. From a rights basis, that means
> that the inventor has the right to do with them as he or she sees fit.
> From a utilitarian basis, if we don't incent the inventor, we don't get
> new ideas.
Under a Libertarian system (which is one of the premises to this arguement),
the "fact" that rights are property should be enough incentive.
A patent system (as in: a system that gives "right" to an idea to the first
person to derive it) potentially violates rights in that it prevents me from
coming up with it all on my own.
> Refute that separately from refuting that ideas are property. If you
> can.
I don't think I did, but I have pointed out a conflict between the two.
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
188 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
