Linked by David Adams on Tue 26th Oct 2004 16:30 UTC
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Nice story but you're missing the point. If it was really just about "survival of the selfish" human beings would have gone extinct thousands of years ago. Patent and copyright theory and law is an order of magnitude or more removed from one hunter discovering a better stalking technique and keeping it to himself.
Society, in the form of laws, grants a limited monopoly to the inventor/artist to exploit his/her "work" for personal profit. Society does this to encourage the individual to develop ideas into new and useful "works" that will be of benefit to society as well as profitable to the individual. It is to the greater benefit of society that such monopoly be limited because someone else may come up with a better way to do it, that is cheaper, more efficient, more environmentally friendly, etc. Thus society takes away the monopoly as it deems most useful to its larger goals.
The real issue I am trying to make is that by granting monopoly rights to an idea (rather than specific "works"), society shoots itself in the foot because it thereby prevents other innovative individuals from developing alternative "works" that might be better than the original patented/copyright work.