See this is a good example. The actual job that is held in 2012 by one Stephan Kinsella is not relevant to whether or not patent and copyright are justified. And without Hitler and the holocaust, there would not be concentration camp guards. So what? And without tax law there would not be tax attorneys. Without cancer there would not be cancer doctors. Without the state's invasion of civil liberties there would be no ACLU. Without poverty there would be no United Way. So what??
Fling insults and then completely miss the point on something, nice job. I was stating this saying that this is how the world works currently and how would your theory change this? The "theory" you speak of is nothing more than that theory. The Big Bang Theory is in the same realm as yours, just words and talk with no proof, yet brings up some valid points and interest, but no proof of happening and in your case working.
You show you don't understand what theory means, if you have this weird notion of its relationship to reality.
No, it's me questioning how this theory of yours is anything more than just a bunch of people getting together coming up with something that they think would work and then meeting those who bring about real world scenarios only to deflect and fling insults.
No it wasn't. What idiot LSU professor taught you this?
Apparently you missed my sarcasm, I'll take the blame on that being this is the internet, the quotations were meant for sarcasm on theory.
YOu sound like you are straining to be a completely unprincipled pragmatist. Except when you want to formulate broad conclusions and principles. You are totally confused about the nature of science and philosophy.
So we're supposed to just think this to working without actual experimenting got ya...
That and $2.50 will get you a latte at Starbucks.
Don't drink Starbucks, so I'll take your word on it, sounds like you're area of expertiece.
Yes, except I formed my views in 1993 or so when I was at a law firm obtaining patents for numerous clients. And in any case this is just yet another amateur dishonest attempt to engage in ad hominem swipes instead of deal with the actual argument. Which I understand since you people are evidently utterly unprepared to engage in.
I understand you have your views, well I am asking questions about them based on real world scenarios. I agree there is a bunch of red tape that doesn't need to exsist, but how is just removing it all going to fix things whenever you can't answer what I'm asking? I guess this is where philosophy protects it again because we need not worry about how it's going to fix things just why it's not justified.
You don't know what you are talking about. I never say abolishing IP would make the world great and amazing.
No, you only brought about a theory on why they aren't needed based on your logic, definitions and so on.
Neither you nor your amateur buddies have even attempted a serious rebuttal of my argument or a defense of IP law.
Everytime I've said something bringing up a scenario you hide behind the fact that this is philosophy. So I guess until I quit analyzing it as a science and use word logic so to speak to question your theory then we're speaking apples and oranges. The scenarios can be deflected by saying, "I'm being philosophical not scientific" since you don't want to experiment.
You know what else sounds cool? Everyone getting free health care, that sounds fantastic until you rob peter to pay paul to get it. The philosophy behind what you're saying may be true, but the real world application of it has no clout. So, cool thought, let me know whenever it can be applied and you've worked the kinks out of it.
You are just repeating slogans like brainwashed children mouthing the Pledge of Allegiance, raising your hands over your hearts at a stupid Lee Greenwood patriotic song during a nationalistic sporting event, letting your children be drafted into a stupid war for the good of god and country, and so on. IT's really sad you don't even realize how intellectually stunted you are.
Not repeating a slogan, repeating a scenario, just questioning your logic by bringing up a simple scenario that occurs in the business world. Theft happens all the time in the realm of business, it's cut throat and people will cheat and steal to get ahead. Currently involved in a situation where one company stole property of another through an employee defecting. Was personally asked by an employeer before if I could bring anything that could help them. I was asked this while changing employment between competitors and the exact verbage was, "Is there anything you can sneak away on a jump drive that could help make things easier for us?" Yet again though, you're keeping your theory in the realm of thought where I am questioning it in reality.
Also, when you resort to flinging insults, kind of takes away from your argument.
This post was edited on 3/21 at 8:17 am