DennisLeeWilson
2014-August-30 07:11:26 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Click here for my public PGP key   Google Translate   Wikipedia Comparison of Language Translator programs   I use Firefox browser & add-on called "Google Translator for Firefox"
“I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past.” ~Thomas Jefferson
“Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge has its limitations, while imagination has no limits.” ~Albert Einstein
I love Arizona, I loathe its intrusive governments, especially the City of Phoenix.

Click image for framed pictures, posters, wall peels etc.


Brainstorming!! Give it a try!   Subject Index to my Published Articles
Creative Commons vs Copyright Notice  Disclaimer


Donations? Hell, NO!*

Because robo-spammers outnumber real people by 20 to 1, you MUST register to post AND your membership MUST be approved.
SEND EMAIL with YOUR comments or a posting to Admin (at) DennisLeeWilson.com to prove that you are NOT an automaton.
Sure. It is a bother. But you only have to do it once to become a member. And you don't have to wade thru the spam.
 
   Home   Help Search Gallery Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: IPR proponents don't need our agreement to protect their property  (Read 1818 times)
DennisLeeWilson
Creator of this site
Administrator
Forum/Blog Owner
*****
Posts: 1221


Existence exists & Man's mind can know it.


WWW Email
« on: 2010-October-20 12:29:30 AM »

IPR proponents don't need our agreement to protect their property
http://dennisleewilson.com/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=481.0
Bold emphasis added.


http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle592-20101017-01.html#letter02

THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 592, October 17, 2010


Letter from Paul Bonneau


There are a few problems with the arguments of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) proponents.

The first thing is that they depend on rights; but there is no such animal. A right is nothing but a meme that is present (or not, or inconsistently) in people's brains. One can claim to own a thing, but it means nothing if he cannot prevent others from taking it.

IPR proponents are like somebody who pins a $1000 bill to the wall at work, saying "This is mine," and then complains when it turns up missing some day. Yeah, you may call the person who took it a thief, if that makes you feel better; but it doesn't get your $1000 back. In a sense, the act of pinning it to the wall brings into question your claim of ownership, no matter what you say or think about it. It's better when people keep a firm grip on reality.

The next problem is that to keep things like $1000 bills pinned to the wall from disappearing, it takes a fair amount of effort and cost (some things are more easily protected than others). Guards need to be hired. There is no better justification for the state protection racket than their claim that they can guard stuff. So, IPR proponents unwittingly rationalize the existence of the state. Now, I imagine some IPR proponents would prefer to buy their protection on the free market. If so, they should do that, and stop going on and on about IPR. They don't need our agreement to protect their property. We don't have to become IPR converts. They should just shut up and protect their stuff as best they can, and stop making arguments helpful to the state.

As to whether people should abscond with $1000 bills that are pinned to the wall, that is a personal matter. I wouldn't do it if I thought there was an owner who could reasonably be found; but that's just me. I don't stay awake at night, mad that others might not be so nice. Again, it's just reality. Deal with it.

Paul Bonneau
2paulbx1dfghnet
« Last Edit: 2010-November-14 10:30:05 AM by DennisLeeWilson » Logged

Objectivist & Sovereign Individual
Creator of Atlas Shrugged Celebration Day & Artemis Zuna Trading Post
Signatory: Covenant of Unanimous Consent
DennisLeeWilson
Creator of this site
Administrator
Forum/Blog Owner
*****
Posts: 1221


Existence exists & Man's mind can know it.


WWW Email
« Reply #1 on: 2010-October-31 08:08:37 PM »

http://tinyurl.com/Great-Milk-Robbery

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle593-20101031-04.html

THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 593, October 31, 2010

The Great Milk Robbery*
by Anthony Shelley
AnthonyShelley@Yahoo.com


Attribute to The Libertarian Enterprise

In last week's TLE, (Number 592, October 17, 2010) Paul Bonneau makes interesting points to IPR proponents without getting into the "we have copies—you still have your original" issue. He puts the burden of property protection where it belongs—on the one who claims ownership.

Whether intentional or not, he uses good Harry Browne-like points.... HB saw rights as a trap, and group traps such as government trap... and HB's answer is to take direct action to get desired results that don't involve changing, controlling, convincing others--including IPR proponents. (Controlling others is a form of dependence on others.)

Freedom from the treadmill: Do what you want to do. But recognize that there are many things you want to do and you can't have them all. So establish priorities in your values and stick to the ones at the top. (Innovation is at the top for me but apparently not for Disney.) When you have to give up the lesser values (such as policing others and forsaking the profits of innovation), don't waste your time bemoaning the loss of what could have been obtained only by giving up something more valuable (which is what Disney, Watt, Whitey, Wright brothers ended up doing.)

In fact HB called this the great milk robbery—leaving one's milk out on the porch and finding it stolen, there is a risk someone will steal it.... so? Put it somewhere else or continue to leave it alone and write off the cost of the robbery because you have more productive uses of your time than catching milk thieves—productive uses such as innovating!


The Great Milk Robbery

To illustrate this, let's suppose that I walk out to my front porch one morning, expecting to pick up my milk. But lo and behold, I find that it's been stolen. What do I do next?

I can bitterly feel that the thief had no right to steal from me. But would that get my milk back? (rights trap)

I could stand on the front porch and deliver an eloquent speech, cursing the disgraceful fact that there are thieves in the world. But what would that get me—aside from a few angry neighbors?

To say that there are thieves in the world is only to repeat what I've known all along. To say that it's disgraceful is to say that if I were God, I'd have made the world differently. But since I'm not God, that point is irrelevant, too.(I would call this the relevance trap)

To say that I would never steal someone's milk is to acknowledge that I'm different from many of the people in the world and that I have my own way of trying to achieve happiness. But why should I expect someone else to use my way? (identity trap)

Direct alternative / self rule:
The only area of interest is that which I control. I've decided to risk theft by having the milk bottles left on the front porch. And I can decide to continue that risk or have the milk handled in some other way.

If I concentrate on the thief's immorality or on my rights, I'm probably leaving myself vulnerable to another theft. But if I use what I control to make new arrangements, I can see to it that the theft isn't repeated—and that should be my major concern.

And I can think about that while I'm pouring water on my Wheaties.

* Ideas from Harry Browne's "How I Found Freedom in an UnFree World"


Mr. Shelley is a Perpetual Traveler, living in a motor-home on Harold Hough's "Freedom Road"

2011-02-15 Added tinyurl and Mr. Shelley's bio
« Last Edit: 2011-February-15 10:03:36 PM by DennisLeeWilson » Logged

Objectivist & Sovereign Individual
Creator of Atlas Shrugged Celebration Day & Artemis Zuna Trading Post
Signatory: Covenant of Unanimous Consent
DennisLeeWilson
Creator of this site
Administrator
Forum/Blog Owner
*****
Posts: 1221


Existence exists & Man's mind can know it.


WWW Email
« Reply #2 on: 2010-November-16 06:38:04 PM »

THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 594, November 7, 2010

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle594-20101107-01.html#letter05

Letter from E.J. Totty

Your argument is COMPLETELY defunct

Re: "The Great Milk Robbery" by Anthony Shelley

You would have the rest of us believe that theft is perfectly okay, as long as you might get away with that.

Well, that goes for rape (theft), and murder too.

Are you still willing to validate your philosophy on those counts as well?

I can't wait to see how you justify your ideals.

And by the way: Harry Brown was a freaking looser if ever there were one!

Thank the lucky stars in whatever Heaven that he was NEVER elected!

E.J. Totty
ejt@seanet.com

THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 595, November 14, 2010

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle595-20101114-01.html#letter02

Letter from Paul Bonneau

Re: E.J. Totty's letter

I was gratified by Shelley's "The Great Milk Robbery", in response to my letter to the editor. It is exciting when one writes something, and another understands perfectly the point one is trying to make—and better yet, expands and clarifies the point.

Inevitably, there is someone who misses the point, replacing the actual argument made with one that was dreamed up. Totty did this. I can find not a single place where Shelley (or myself for that matter) argued that "theft is perfectly okay, as long as you might get away with that." In fact Shelley argues directly the opposite, "...I would never steal someone's milk..." One normally does not advocate X by saying he would never do X!

People really ought to try setting aside preconceptions before reading such articles. This allows one to correctly detect the actual point being made.

As to whether my arguments originated in Harry Browne's mind or not, I don't know. I have read a couple of his books many years ago. Maybe some meme was lodged in my mind at the time. As many have noted, there aren't that many original ideas out there. I do know Jeff Snyder has written on this some, and Stefan Molyneux has a podcast or two digging into the notion of property in very great detail. I've been influenced by many like this. But I also just wonder what exactly property is, and whether it is necessarily connected to the state; and if not, how is it modified so that it still works reasonably. Unlike "left libertarians", I do think property survives as a useful (if not crucial) concept, but probably somewhat different than when the state is mixed into it, and therefore different from what we are used to.

Paul Bonneau
2paulbx1dfghnet
« Last Edit: 2010-November-16 06:40:36 PM by DennisLeeWilson » Logged

Objectivist & Sovereign Individual
Creator of Atlas Shrugged Celebration Day & Artemis Zuna Trading Post
Signatory: Covenant of Unanimous Consent
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!