Intellectual Property rights

If people are sovereign beings, then without contradiction I must assert that sovereign beings must make contractual agreements in concordance of each others sovereignty which includes the product of a sovereign being to another sovereign being. I do not disbelieve in contractual agreements,to do so is to believe there is no sovereign being in the first place.


And yet, NOBODY has argued in any way against legitimate contractual arrangements. So your post is nothing more than ANOTHER straw man.
 
You don't understand how awesome I am at what I do, therefore my work is worth something, therefore I should have control of other people's property to make sure it's not like my awesome work so that only I can sell property in a similar arrangement.

^
Captain's argument in a nutshell.
I love how every comment you make against me is condescending and unintelligent ,lacking in actual debate.
 
Really? Would you like to speak to the classical guitarist who gave me lessons at the age of 5 and how astonished he was when I watched him play an etude and instantly played it back at him without even reading the music?


As a guitarist myself, I sit in awe at your obviously god-like talent. /sarcasm

Get over yourself.
 
And yet, NOBODY has argued in any way against legitimate contractual arrangements. So your post is nothing more than ANOTHER straw man.
Look back a few pages and see that "user" contract of property is disregarded . Once again, your side of the debate would advocate the removal of the existence of "fraud" and the action of being "fraudulent".
 
I love how every comment you make against me is condescending and unintelligent ,lacking in actual debate.

I tried, but you avoided everything I and everyone else was saying and kept repeating your nonsense over and over and calling people Marxists.

obtuse-angle.gif
 
Look back a few pages and see that "user" contract of property is disregarded . Once again, your side of the debate would advocate the removal of the existence of "fraud" and the action of being "fraudulent".


You must have missed the qualifier "legitimate."
 
Really? Would you like to speak to the classical guitarist who gave me lessons at the age of 5 and how astonished he was when I watched him play an etude and instantly played it back at him without even reading the music?
Sure. I'd also tell it to my composition instructor was astonished that I could produce more an elaborate quartet in less than a week and to my Russian teacher who was astonished that I had taught myself everything she had originally planned to teach me. ;) "Talent" is just another name for a lot of work and discipline.
 
I tried, but you avoided everything I and everyone else was saying and kept repeating your nonsense over and over and calling people Marxists.

obtuse-angle.gif
What is your view on property when it is given to another person with user agreement/contract?

What are your views on "fraud"?
 
Sure. I'd also tell it to my composition instructor was astonished that I could produce more an elaborate quartet in less than a week and to my Russian teacher who was astonished that I had taught myself everything she had originally planned to teach me. ;) "Talent" is just another name for a lot of work and discipline.


99% persperation
1% inspiration
 
Sure. I'd also tell it to my composition instructor was astonished that I could produce more an elaborate quartet in less than a week and to my Russian teacher who was astonished that I had taught myself everything she had originally planned to teach me. ;) "Talent" is just another name for a lot of work and discipline.
Yes ,that explains why there are so many Mozart's and Beethovens in the world.
 
you treat the "market" as if it is separate from any law. But to do so you must abolish all existence of the notion of "fraud". Like I said before there are those who are anarchists,and those who are not anarchists.

I'm not an anarchist, but that does not matter. Your statement is false. Fraud would still exist. Fraud is intentional deception, we have already determined that. If you write a piece of music and I copy it then say it is mine, that is fraud. If I copy your lyrics and say they aren't mine, I broke IP laws, but I did not commit fraud. If I wrote the same lyrics as yours, unknowing of yours and claimed they were mine, I broke IP laws, but did not commit fraud.
 
No, it explains why there are so few-not many are willing to put the work in. Mozart and Beethoven both worked their ASSES off.
I thought you put a lot of work and effort into music, and you learned everything your teacher knew. Where is your 9th symphony sir beethoven jr?
 
Fallacy, you are radical because you dismiss actual natural born talent.
Talent:
1.a special natural ability or aptitude: a talent for drawing.
Everyone has natural ability or aptitude to one degree or another. Some simply take the time to develop it better than others.
 
I'm not an anarchist, but that does not matter. Your statement is false. Fraud would still exist. Fraud is intentional deception, we have already determined that. If you write a piece of music and I copy it then say it is mine, that is fraud. If I copy your lyrics and say they aren't mine, I broke IP laws, but I did not commit fraud. If I wrote the same lyrics as yours, unknowing of yours and claimed they were mine, I broke IP laws, but did not commit fraud.

So, I steal your vehicle and say that it is mine, it's fraud.

So, if I steal your vehicle, and say that it is not mine, everything is just fine.

I realize this depends on what each side of this debate views as 'property', but that's what I was referring to in regard to different planes of debate several pages back. The IP debate always results in long threads with both sides speaking at each other like we're using different root words as the basis of our language. It's no wonder we can't understand each other, really. It's everyone's fault and no one's fault at the same time.
 
Back
Top