[Ogf-l] Value of IP and IP laws

[Githianki]

[[[Quote Lynn: Your said "the average person seems to be beginning to doubt the value of IP laws". The average person who uses IP like music and software (which is an expression of value) is very likely to pirate IP if there is no protective measures in place. Im sure the Cookie Monster would doubt the value of a padlock on the cookie jar. ]]]End Quote. Exactly, my point. If the average person is the Coookie Monster then they are doubting the value of the locks on the cookie jar (the IP laws).  I never said that people doubt the value of the underlying work.  If they did, they might not bother with copying it at all, except maybe out of a behavioral pattern which is beyond the scope of this discussion.  Furthermore, if the average person would sooner ignore IP laws rather than respect them, it follows that they recognize little value in having such laws personally apply to them.   [[[Quote Lynn: IP laws protect those who invest in IP, because IP IS property. ]]]End Quote. This is how the laws are being structured, but the original intent was not to create a new form of property, it was to secure rights to an expression of an idea which itself cannot be owned.  The property is not the underlying material that someone "invests" in creating, the property is the right to sell, copy, etc. that material. That is why you can sell your rights to copy, reproduce, and so forth.  You don't actually sell the idea/expression because that is an intangible.   You sell either copies of it or the rights to make copies of it.  In many cases there is only one copy, the original.  You can even sell the rights to derive from it, but even the current laws don't give you ownership of something that is derived from a property that you own the rights to derive from.   Perhaps, the laws should have been termed Intellectual Commerce Rights or something instead of Intellectual Property.   Like you said, a lot of people don't create material (and that could be argued from a different angle elsewhere) and take advantage of IP protections/grants.  However, plenty of people who do create such material are still of the opinion that there should be limits to the scope of IP laws.  Progress, depends on it.  Since the current climate involves extending and strengthening those laws I would say that even these average folks have some doubts about the value of IP laws, as they are being administered and legislated today. Ryan has mentioned the unethical climate that spawned the OGL.  This was the observation that some people who scream about how hard they have worked and how much they have invested in developing some bit of "intellectual property" in actuality derived and received benefit from those who passed before, but wished to deny those rights to those who came after. The OGL forces people to grant the same rights they receive. Finally, way too many people who argue for the strengthening of IP laws do so on the basis of arguments like "I have invested so much," or "If you knew how much it cost me to bring this to you."  That is bunk.  Copyrights and Patents (IP laws) are not mean to guarantee anyone a return or profit on their investment.  If someone has put  a lot into an idea to increase its market value, that has been done at their own risk and the market doesn't owe them anything.  The laws exist as a restraint on the free market, as an incentive to share the idea as opposed to withhold it.  The idea withheld is worth nothing to anyone. -Alex Silva