Blog My random thoughts

June 20, 2011

A Defense of Intellectual Property part 2

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 11:08 PM

I’ll keep talking about this until I run out of things to say. The first post was largely about copyrights. This post is more about IP laws in general. Future topics will include patents, trademarks, trade secrets, bloated IP laws v. the fundamental concept of IP, and game theory as related to IP works.

For now, let me talk about the second clause of the statement from the following blog post comment: “Even if you were to concede that economic benefits flow from IP protections (and I would argue that, empirically, they do not), it is indefensible as imposed by government onto a society that has not freely chosen it.” (And here’s the blog link again http://solutionproblem.wordpress.com/2011/06/16/an-intellectual-property-troll-loses-in-court/)

Society chose IP laws – getting rid of IP laws at this point without substitution of a general libertarian framework or additional IP protections would crush the economy and be unfair to those who have built a life around IP work. IP laws are a fundamental part of the Constitution. Consider the many many many inventions that would remain trade secrets instead of patents if no protection was available. In seventeen years, patents expire. Now I am not ruling out getting rid of ridiculous IP laws or that the market can’t find a solution, but I do know that many corporations would collapse instantaneously if patent rights were revoked. Maybe you want to see all healthcare corporations, mechanical defense manufacturers, electronic companies, and every other physical producer of anything fail overnight, but I think the system is too tied to patent laws to ever be rid of them without rewriting the Constitution.

So what if we replaced it with a libertarian system completely devoid of copyright? It would work like this: a record company sells a CD; a person buys the CD; person uploads the CD to the internet; record company carpetbombs any user, uploader, downloader, hoster, or third party application provider with a DoS attack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial-of-service_attack); record company buys out all third party application providers, internet providers, and distribution avenues. I’m pretty fine with that, but DoS attacks are illegal right now.

Anyway, this is not a completely well thought out argument, but it’s not difficult to see all the issues that could come from cutting off IP laws in general.

A Defense of Intellectual Property part 1

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 10:55 PM

(more…)

Other blog posts

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 8:53 PM

If anyone is interested, I will have very specific blog posts up on the following website: https://focusonhealthcare.wordpress.com/

These will focus on HIPAA, electronic data retention, legal requirements, costs, and anything else particularly interesting to me about health care laws.

I’ll still post random stuff here.

June 8, 2011

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 1:18 PM

This Day in Future History

September 16, 2019:
NEWS WIRE –
It is an unforgettable scene. In what would otherwise be a sadly common standoff between the DEA and armed drug dealers, the arrival of local law enforcement adds increasing intensity to the situation. Sheriff Alvarez calmly steps out of her squad vehicle and kindly requests a DEA agent armed to the teeth to leave or face arrest for false imprisonment.

The tension in that moment was as strong as the cables on the recently finished Lower Bay Bridge. What sparked that brave police sheriff to step into a federal drug siege? The drug of choice for these dealers – marijuana. Since the general legalization of marijuana use in California in 2012, this scene was bound to happen. But it took a California Governor-turned-Presidential Candidate squaring off with the incumbent President and a general election only a month away for an old-school State versus Federal government standoff.

The governor recently ordered all state police to protect citizens from “unlawful” arrests by federal agents for any marijuana charge. To further complicate matters, each side of this tussle had a valid warrant ordering the other to back down. The DEA agents had a federal warrant, the sheriff had a state judge signed warrant. Supremacy Clause and federalism questions lead to a lengthy discussion between all involved. The thick air was finally broken by the drug dealers (or small business owners according to California code) voluntarily lowering weapons and agreeing to be taken into custody by the federal agents.

While this may happen again, it is bound to be a precedent setting case when it comes to trial. One man arrested swore he would take his fight to the California Supreme Court. Thankfully this episode ended peacefully, but there is no telling what might occur if there is no peaceful remedy next time.

Powered by WordPress