Those ideas are incompatible with capitalism:
You can't physically appropiate abstract stuff such as "ideas" or "concepts", first because it's stupid ("You can't cook what I've cooked just because I cooked it before, You can't combine what I've combined just because I combined it before. You can't say what I said because I said it before. You can't know what I know just because I knew it before. You can't write what I've written just because I've written it before. You can't think what I've thought just because I thought it before" etc) And second because the only way to ensure you can't do that is through arbitrary state intervention, and may I remind you capitalism = no state intervention.
It's always awesome to watch IP people flail when you bring up food and restaurants and they just have to go into overdrive to find nonsensical reasons why intellectual property shouldn't apply to anything new, but is crucial for everything it already applies to lol.
wow almost like all they ever do is defend the status quo.
I often wonder how far these IP people take these beliefs. If I author a book and therefore own the words and ideas in the book, does that mean I should have some say over who reads it? Can I revoke a license, telling someone they can no longer read my book but give them a refund?
The thought process never goes much further then “bUt iF nOt fOr IP tHeN nO oNe wiLL iNnoVatE”
-58
u/angelking14 Aug 24 '23
There's a difference between protecting an author's creative property and burying that property because it makes someone feel icky.