@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:
Night Ripper wrote:Why should copyright infringement be illegal?
It's a matter of defining property rights. I know you agree that physical stuff should be privately owned, and that such ownership rights should be enforced, by force if necessary. Why, then, shouldn't property rights cover immaterial structures, like an arrangement of ones and zeros? A structure is nothing material, and therefore the act of depriving someone of his property does not involve carrying physical stuff away. But why would that mean that we can't enforce such property rights?
The only reason why I agree with physical property rights is because physical property is scarce. If I take your car, you can no longer use it. I've deprived you of something. If I take your ideas, you can still use them. I've deprived you of nothing.
I also disagree with intangible property rights because they make claims of control on other people's property. In a more perfect society, if I own a pen and some paper, I can do whatever I want with that pen and paper because it's mine, including writing a copy of a Harry Potter novel on it and giving it to a friend. In our current society, I can't do that. Even though I own that property, I'm limited in how I can use it by someone else.
There are two ways in which one my obtain property, by trading for it or by claiming unowned property. Neither of these methods involves creating something. If you steal some of my raw metal and make a sword with it, you don't gain ownership of that sword just because you mixed your labor with it. In fact, I would accuse you of theft and damage of property.
These three things taken together form the basis of why I don't recognize intangible property as legitimate.
