The idea was immediately opposed by the United States, the European Union, Britain, Norway, Switzerland, Japan, Canada, Australia and Brazil. It was opposed again at another meeting in November, and again last week.
By our count, nearly 100 countries favor the proposal,
It's not a coincidence that the countries that respect intellectual property rights are also the only ones in the running to develop that intellectual property.
As someone who opposes the concept of IP on private property grounds, I recognize that it does buy innovation in some situations, and our intellectual economies are built on the concept in places where infrastructure and technology are most advanced (which might be causal). That said, I wish there were a moral, technologically advanced society where IP could be phased out, so we could see whether other models for funding R&D might get similar or better results long-term. Looking at things like distributed patronage, universities funded by alumni donations, etc.
I'm an AnCap, so it's a habit to wish for those kinds of things.
Looking at things like distributed patronage, universities funded by alumni donations, etc.
If alumni can't profit from their education (which is largely IP these days) they won't have money to donate.
Without incentives humans aren't productive. Just look at all these wannabe college communists: they're not becoming productive members of society who offer their labor for the greater good.
They're becoming journalists, social "science" "researchers", teachers who don't teach but preach and activists who try to destroy society.
When the most fervent advocates of a "utopian society" are the worst leeches on said society you know the idea is doomed right from the start.
IP production careers are a substantial portion of degrees right now, to be sure, which is why I want to see it phased out in a part of society so that we could see how that might change over time. I also want to see colleges in general lose the subsidies and student loan guarantees, because most of them have failed at their telos.
Incentives are important, and are the best argument in favor of IP, but I don't see any way that IP doesn't end up being a threat against people to arrest them if they use their own property in a way that they know how to do, just because a different group of people figured out how to do it first and haven't given them permission.
There are two things that drive technological progress: fighting for survival and profit. Personally I prefer the latter. It's not perfect but it's better than everything else humanity has tried (which always led to the former).
Colleges on the other hand certainly need a reform. They've been taken over by nonsense like "social sciences" that do nothing but hinder actual progress.
China has exposed all the major flaws in socialising the security of trade secrets. The idea of big daddy government's protection has ensured that companies won't even attempt to defend themselves from foreign competitors
It's not a coincidence that the countries that respect intellectual property rights are also the only ones in the running to develop that intellectual property.
As someone who opposes the concept of IP on private property grounds, I recognize that it does buy innovation in some situations, and our intellectual economies are built on the concept in places where infrastructure and technology are most advanced (which might be causal). That said, I wish there were a moral, technologically advanced society where IP could be phased out, so we could see whether other models for funding R&D might get similar or better results long-term. Looking at things like distributed patronage, universities funded by alumni donations, etc.
I'm an AnCap, so it's a habit to wish for those kinds of things.
If alumni can't profit from their education (which is largely IP these days) they won't have money to donate.
Without incentives humans aren't productive. Just look at all these wannabe college communists: they're not becoming productive members of society who offer their labor for the greater good.
They're becoming journalists, social "science" "researchers", teachers who don't teach but preach and activists who try to destroy society.
When the most fervent advocates of a "utopian society" are the worst leeches on said society you know the idea is doomed right from the start.
IP production careers are a substantial portion of degrees right now, to be sure, which is why I want to see it phased out in a part of society so that we could see how that might change over time. I also want to see colleges in general lose the subsidies and student loan guarantees, because most of them have failed at their telos.
Incentives are important, and are the best argument in favor of IP, but I don't see any way that IP doesn't end up being a threat against people to arrest them if they use their own property in a way that they know how to do, just because a different group of people figured out how to do it first and haven't given them permission.
There are two things that drive technological progress: fighting for survival and profit. Personally I prefer the latter. It's not perfect but it's better than everything else humanity has tried (which always led to the former).
Colleges on the other hand certainly need a reform. They've been taken over by nonsense like "social sciences" that do nothing but hinder actual progress.
China has exposed all the major flaws in socialising the security of trade secrets. The idea of big daddy government's protection has ensured that companies won't even attempt to defend themselves from foreign competitors