Copyright Infringement

@parados,

parados wrote:

Can you provide evidence that ideas are infinite?

The idea of, say, a "cat" can be contained within the mind of a single person a million people or an infinite number of people. It's common sense. It's quite pathetic how desperate your side of the argument is. This discussion was meant to find any weaknesses in my beliefs but all you've done so far is strengthened them.

1 Reply

@melonkali,

Rights to a song are different from rights to a recorded performance.

0 Replies

@Night Ripper,

Quote:

The idea of, say, a "cat" can be contained within the mind of a single person a million people or an infinite number of people. It's common sense.

Can you provide evidence that there are an infinite number of people?

If not then it's speculation and nothing more.

Wow.. that was easy. Your argument just fell apart using your logic.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:
The idea of, say, a "cat" can be contained within the mind of a single person a million people or an infinite number of people. It's common sense.

Can you provide evidence that there are an infinite number of people?

If not then it's speculation and nothing more.

Wow.. that was easy. Your argument just fell apart using your logic.

What a joke. It doesn't matter if there isn't an infinite number of people. If there were, the same idea could be had by all of them.

You're just embarrassing yourself with this immature behavior. If you keep it up and don't add anything meaningful I'll put you on ignore as well. At least Joe is actually trying (and failing) but you're not even trying.

1 Reply

@Night Ripper,

Quote:

What a joke. It doesn't matter if there isn't an infinite number of people.

Really? Then why does it matter if the universe is infinite? Why did you ask if I can provide evidence of that?

Either something is finite or it isn't. If it is finite then you are arguing that would make it scarce. If there is a finite number of people then there certainly would be a finite number of thoughts so your argument runs into a problem with definitions.

2 Replies

@parados,

You're right that NR is being inconsistent.

But unfortunately, it doesn't refute his argument.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:

What a joke. It doesn't matter if there isn't an infinite number of people.

Really? Then why does it matter if the universe is infinite? Why did you ask if I can provide evidence of that?

Either something is finite or it isn't. If it is finite then you are arguing that would make it scarce. If there is a finite number of people then there certainly would be a finite number of thoughts so your argument runs into a problem with definitions.

It doesn't matter if the people are finite. Each one of them can have the same idea. That's what it means for there to be an unlimited number of the same idea. There's no limit to how many people can have it, even if there is a limit to the number of people. This is embarrassingly simple if you would put more than a moments thought into it.

Also, like I said, even assuming there are an infinite number of oxygen molecules in the universe they are practically finite because we can't get to them. Ideas don't work like that.

2 Replies

@Night Ripper,

Night Ripper wrote:

Ideas don't work like that.

But ideas aren't subject to copyright.

1 Reply

@Night Ripper,

Quote:

Also, like I said, even assuming there are an infinite number of oxygen molecules in the universe they are practically finite because we can't get to them. Ideas don't work like that.

Really? How do you propose to get to the ideas of someone else? As Joe already pointed out you can't copyright ideas.

How many people have written Shakespeare's plays? How many have written the movie Avatar? Can you show where you have thought the complete text of Hamlet before reading it? Can you show where anyone else did it?

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

joefromchicago wrote:

Night Ripper wrote:
Ideas don't work like that.

But ideas aren't subject to copyright.

I mean any kind of intellectual creation. Art doesn't work like that. You're just being pedantic now.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

How many people have written Shakespeare's plays? How many have written the movie Avatar? Can you show where you have thought the complete text of Hamlet before reading it? Can you show where anyone else did it?

One person wrote it but anyone can copy it. You're not even making sense.

2 Replies

@Night Ripper,

Quote:

It doesn't matter if there isn't an infinite number of people. If there were, the same idea could be had by all of them.

Quote:

One person wrote it but anyone can copy it. You're not even making sense.

I don't think I'm the one not making sense.

Is it the same thing to think something as it is to write it down?

But then you write this

Quote:

I mean any kind of intellectual creation.

Is an intellectual creation scarce? It certainly is finite.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:
It doesn't matter if there isn't an infinite number of people. If there were, the same idea could be had by all of them.

Quote:
One person wrote it but anyone can copy it. You're not even making sense.

I don't think I'm the one not making sense.

Is it the same thing to think something as it is to write it down?

Whether the copy is in your head or on a piece of paper, it's a copy.

1 Reply

@Night Ripper,

Is an intellectual creation scarce? It certainly is finite.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Is an intellectual creation scarce? It certainly is finite.

This canard has been brought up several times. That's not what scarcity means in this context. It wouldn't matter if there were only one novel in existence because there would still be an infinite supply of that novel. So, it's not scarce even if novels are rare.

2 Replies

@Night Ripper,

Night Ripper wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:

Night Ripper wrote:
Ideas don't work like that.

But ideas aren't subject to copyright.

I mean any kind of intellectual creation. Art doesn't work like that. You're just being pedantic now.

No, not this time. You argue that copyrightable items aren't subject to ownership because they are not scarce. To support that position, however, you contend that ideas are infinite. But ideas aren't subject to copyright, so that's a non sequitur -- it's completely irrelevant to your argument. You might as well say: "copyrightable items aren't subject to ownership because they are not scarce, and the Komodo dragon is the world's largest living lizard."

0 Replies

@Night Ripper,

Night Ripper wrote:

One person wrote it but anyone can copy it.

Then this is just an is/ought problem. You argue that anyone should be able to copy intellectual property, but you derive that from the fact that anyone can copy intellectual property. But the fact that anyone can make copies doesn't mean that anyone should make copies.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

joefromchicago wrote:

No, not this time.

That's a tacit admission that you were being pedantic at one point at least.

joefromchicago wrote:

You argue that copyrightable items aren't subject to ownership because they are not scarce. To support that position, however, you contend that ideas are infinite.

I also argue that copyrightable items aren't scarce too but you're just going to ignore that since it suites you.

joefromchicago wrote:

Night Ripper wrote:
One person wrote it but anyone can copy it.

Then this is just an is/ought problem. You argue that anyone should be able to copy intellectual property, but you derive that from the fact that anyone can copy intellectual property. But the fact that anyone can make copies doesn't mean that anyone should make copies.

No, I start with the presupposition that property rights only apply to things with a limited supply. I've already given my argument for that presupposition too. In a world with infinite identical watches floating all around us, it makes no sense to single out a particular floating watch and claim that it is yours. There would be nothing wrong with taking that watch that you have claimed since you could simply replace it. Bringing up the is/ought problem is a red herring. I suppose you've solved it though and you're going to tell me why I should not copy things freely?

0 Replies

@Night Ripper,

Quote:

. It wouldn't matter if there were only one novel in existence because there would still be an infinite supply of that novel

Now we are back to what does "infinite" mean?

There would not be an infinite supply because there is a finite amount of paper to copy it to. There are a finite number of people that could "think" about it.

In fact it would be more scarce than air is by any counting method I can think of.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:
. It wouldn't matter if there were only one novel in existence because there would still be an infinite supply of that novel

Now we are back to what does "infinite" mean?

There would not be an infinite supply because there is a finite amount of paper to copy it to. There are a finite number of people that could "think" about it.

In fact it would be more scarce than air is by any counting method I can think of.

This is the same argument Joe already made and I shot it down then too. You're trying to transfer the scarcity of paper to the scarcity of the art but that doesn't work. If there were infinite paper, there could be infinite copies of a novel. That's all that matters.

1 Reply

Copyright Infringement

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know