On 12 Aug 2009 at 10:56, John Williams wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Dan M<dsummersmi...@comcast.net> wrote: > > > John, would you agree that some sort of community system, like the courts, > > are necessary to resolve disputes over true ownership of property, > > contracts, and the like? > > Necessary, no, I can imagine alternatives that might be practical, at > least on a small scale. But desirable, yes, I think it is a good idea > to have some sort of government justice system to settle contractual > and legal disagreements. I've never met anyone who thinks that a free > market means total anarchy. A free market simply means that people are > free to enter into agreements with others. If these agreements are > formalized into a contract, then it is a good idea to have some way -- > that all parties agree is fair -- to enforce the contract. I think a
The missing element is an easy to to assure that contracts are equitable. That is, there is no system of templates and checks (think legal AI on tap) to check the contacts you'd enter into, when you say buy some software. If the contracts are visible (maybe even a RFID tag on the software box, to continue that example) and examinable before purchase, that you be asked if you agree with the terms before purchase and so on.. well, then you might have a point. (And indeed on this particular point I'd agree, including agreements between people to do things which would otherwise be on shaky legal grounds) However, that system /must/ be fully in place (and it involves, among other things, proper identity authentication services (which to me /is/ a proper government function, on-tap legal AI's and more) /and/ I do not in any way see it excluding the role of government and taxation in other areas. AndrewC _______________________________________________ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
