Intellectual Property should be abolished - change my mind! - Lemmy.world
lemmy.world
I am strongly convinced that the possession of ideas and creations of the intellect is not possible. In my opinion, only physical things can be possessed, that is, things that are limited, that is, that can only be in one place. The power or the freedom to do with the object what one wants corresponds to the concept of possession. This does not mean, however, that one must expose everything openly. This is ultimately the difference between proprietary solutions, where the “construction manual” is kept to oneself, and the open source philosophy, where this source is accessible to everyone. As the title says, I would oppose this thesis to your arguments and hope that together we can rethink and improve our positions. Please keep in mind that this can be an enrichment for all, so we discuss with each other and not against each other ;)

Hey mateys!

I made a post at /c/libertarianism about the abolition of IP. Maybe some of you will find it interesting.

Please answer in the other community so that all the knowledge is in one place and easier to discover.

  • explodicle@local106.com
    13·
    1 year ago

    Donations and crowdfunds are the most common suggestions.

    Or to come at it from another angle - 38% of the USA’s GDP comes from IP, and its primary beneficiaries are wealthy. If we paid towards a UBI instead of copyright holders, then many people would just make these things for free, with total creative freedom. The messages in our art and direction of our technology would radically change.

    • Kelsenellenelvial@lemmy.ca
      1·
      1 year ago

      Canada had a system where we charged a levy on things like blank media, then distributed that levy to right holders. I don’t think it was a very good system, but maybe something that could have been improved upon.

      • explodicle@local106.com
        1·
        1 year ago

        Did they just give an equal payout to each artist, or did they pay out proportional to existing revenue? That is to say, did Disney get more of this money than some novelist in a cabin?

        • Kelsenellenelvial@lemmy.ca
          3·
          1 year ago

          I think it was based on things like radio play time, ratings, sales, etc… So Disney and other big names would have got a proportially bigger cut than smaller artists.