At any rate, nobody is entitled to a song just because it exists. If someone can't afford a song (or can't consent to its licensing terms), they should find a more agreeable alternative rather than taking it on their own terms. They are (hopefully) already doing this with physical goods such as food, clothing, and vehicles, so it shouldn't be too hard to adjust.
It is not a “fictious construct of the elite classes”… it is very much real, it just isnt physical… non-physical does not make a thing fictitious.
IP requires the illegitimate use of force to extract wealth for the benefit of someone who has no control over their creative work.
Also not true, not only is the use of force legitimate (as it has entered into law democratically) it also is not used over someone who “has no control over their creative work”… you have all the control over your creative work you want, as long as you arent stealing from others when you do it.
And yes it limits derivative works, as well it should. You are, however, welcome to design and build your idea from scratch. You arent limited in any meaningful way, you just can’t steal other peoples hard work to avoid doing your own hard work.
So it is 'real' why? Because some rich guys set up a system that a minor majority supports? I assume this leads into the 'social contract' argument, but that is a construct too. Govt is a construct to support the rich. Democracy is a tool of the elites to instill submission in the people and to capitalize on the the weakness of the minority. IP, like govt, is only 'real' because a ruling class decides that it is real.
So it is ‘real’ why?
Because it exists and is utilized by society. I cant believe I need explain the meaning of “real”.
If i imagine a picture of a unicorn in my head then that thought is real, the unicorn is not, but i actually had the thought and therefore it is real.
I really shouldnt need to explain what the meaning of real is. No it has nothing to with who set up the system or how many people support it. So long as it exists, tangibly or not, then it is real, buy definition.
@freemo @Albright @null0x0 it exists in your mind. It is not legitimate. This concept of govt is, in fact, a fairy tale. I don't deny that there is a group of thugs who tell us that we owe them some homage. I believe they they have very large guns. I believe that they do enforce their rule for the benefit of some and the detriment of the majority. Law is a mythological tool to keep you submissive to the thugs that rule over you.
That is the whole of the matter
No it doesnt exist in my mind. It has been codified on paper, executed through actions.. etc.
As for it not being legitimate, you clearly dont know what the meaning of that word is. Legitimate is defined as "conforming to the law or rules"... It is quite literally legitimate by definition.
You cant in one breath say that they exist and are real, and then in the same breath try to claim they are a fiction... you are making not a lick of sense. What you probably mean is you dont agree with it, or that the ideas it espouses are human creations.. but none of that makes it a fantasy. Your throwing words around and using them in a way that is in no way related to what those words mean.
Legitimate: just, righteous, moral, etc. It means that a group of thugs that call themselves govt/God/the priesthood/the saints shall not claim power through murder. They continue it and were founded upon it.
Farmers didn't like that God... I mean George Washington (1/2)
Someone decided that there should be Manifest Destiny, a truly spiritual claim, so they murdered Natives across the whole land.
You refuse the theft of your property and govt will come and take it by force and murder you if you resist.
QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves. A STEM-oriented instance.
An inclusive free speech instance.
All cultures and opinions welcome.
Explicit hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.
We federate with all servers: we don't block any servers.