OSNews

Ad hominem attack. Nice work.

I am simply pointing out that you are either making deliberately false statements, or you have no idea what you are talking about (I suspect the latter). The fact that you cannot mount a coherent argument leaves me with no choice but to suspect your personal motives or capabilities, since you have no actual argument for me to respond to.

If you had some kind of intelligible case for me to debate, then that is what I would do. Since you don't, I won't.

Actually it DOES diminish the creative process. There is prior art. In order to be novel in my opinion it must be completely new. Not a single part of an invention can even remotely resemble something else invented/discovered/mentioned or thought of.

The moment your work is (in one way or another) inspired by somebody else your work ceases to be original.

It may not be the definition according to law, but it is my opinion of "prior art". Law doesn't matter. Law is irrelevant. Human Law is not an absolute (with the possible exception of fundamental rights - I'll leave that question to somebody else).

Not true at all. For example, I could build on the design of a car engine by developing an entirely new way of delivering fuel to the cylinders (as has been done before in radically different and original ways by various inventors). What you seem to be missing here is that someone can tack on an entirely original component to an existing invention, or create a novel variation, and provided such inventions are not bleeding obvious to an expert in that particular field, then that inventor will be given credit for their original additions, and rightly so.

Your opinion (without any rational argument to back it up), and it is good that you have finally made it clear that that is all it is, is unlikely to be shared by anyone with a sane, sensible concept of what constitutes original thought, and in fact is likely to be taken with some offence by anyone who has put time and effort into inventing new solutions to our problems.

I don't think you understand the amount of creative genius that has gone into even seemingly minor improvements on existing work, let alone major inventions, and the way you want to trivialise and diminish the hard work and intelligence of inventors is frankly disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[q]Law doesn't matter. Law is irrelevant.[/i]
I'm sure you'll be pleased to explain this viewpoint to the next person who is robbed, assaulted, slandered or has their intellectual property violated etc.

I think you will find that the law is very relevant if you go around violating people's patents and copyright, and the law is designed to serve the interests of society, not to countenance every weird and extreme opinion that pops up.

Law is what binds human beings together into a functioning society, and if you really think the law doesn't matter, you are an anarchistic fool. I hope for your sake you don't get in trouble with the law, because you will very abruptly find out how wrong you are if you do.