Oddbean new post about login | logout Copying is not theft. Stealing a thing leaves one less left Copying it makes one thing more; that’s what copying’s for. Copying is not theft. If I copy yours you have it too One for me and one for you That’s what copies can do. If I steal your bicycle you have to take the bus, but if I just copy it there’s one for each of us! Making more of a thing, that is what we call “copying” Sharing ideas with everyone That’s why copying is FUN!
Copy cat https://m.primal.net/LfLf.jpg
Gonna copy this note 👍
When is it plagiarism? Is intellectual property not a thing anymore?
Never was in modern sense. It's invention of corporations to have enormous amounts of money for nothing.
This bothers me so much. It's a question of ethics and this argumentation just ignores that. Yes, taking somebody's work's copy and making use of it while disregarding the author of it is stealing.
Honestly people ignoring this are the ones who never really created original work themselves. Go write a song, or a book, paint something, create a unique program. And then watch somebody else earn money from it while investing none of your lost resources.
I think you are missing the point here. Please watch this 1 minute video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4 And after that watch this 1 minute video created by the same person: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PW-pPUYcroQ
Cannot be unheard
Product development doesn't just fucking happen. It's an invention for people who want to live in a civilized society where investors and innovators aren't just sacrificial animals who get no reward for their effort. You can't compete with someone who gets the benefit of your labor without bearing any of the cost for it. The mental gymnastics to justify stealing is quite incredible.
The only thing wrong with plagiarism is pretending you made it yourself. Copy and give credit.
There is no such thing as intellectual property outside of stuff you keep secret. Once you put it out in public it is no longer property. It’s plagiarism when you claim to be the original creator of the exact thought and you’re not. Plagiarism is an academic/reputation/moral issue, not a criminal issue.
I think we have a practical problem. It’s just a gut feeling, so forgive me if I bungle my argument. If anything I write and post on nostr instantly becomes public it no longer matters who published it, because it can be copied endlessly and I can’t stop it. If we don’t care about authorship, then why bother with identity? If identity doesn’t matter, why do we insist on signing everything? I think this issue is important for creators.
I think we care about authorship/identity because we care about reputation/trustworthiness. The original organizer of good ideas will be who people seek out when they have new questions. People who copy (including AIs) will only be able to answer with summaries of already answered questions.
I keep coming back to reputation as well. It just seems fragile. Maybe it’s supposed to be. I also think it’s better to post into a public void and be aware that you are basically giving the words away, than posting on centralized platforms, where there are miles of legal text of what will and won’t be done with your content which is then changed on a whim anyway. I just think we haven’t quite wrapped our heads around the fact that nostr is in fact a public square.
You essentially are making those investors take the bus if you copy their product and sell it a price they can't compete with. There's a difference between an idea and a usable product that has been developed at an expense. Plenty of people have ideas, but that isn't worth shit unless someone is willing to invest their energy into making it real. We protect intellectual property so investors can recoup their investments rather than just being eaten by people who didn't take the initial risk. If you want to give away what you invest in and create then fine. But you don't get to say that forcing everyone else to do that isn't theft. This seems like it was written by a mentally delayed child in a communist country.
Imagine thinking ideas are exclusive and it is the role of government to stop other people from using the ideas you put into public. That sounds more communist to me. If you don’t want other people to copy your ideas, it’s on you to keep them a trade secret. If patents and copyright weren’t a fake form of government intrusion, they’d never expire.
#Kopimism
Yeah, doesn't work that way for intellectual property though.
I was so condition about copyrights and I thought this was a theft. Until I did some research and bumped into a book: "Against Intellectual Monopoly" and it open my eyes to the world I barely noticed! Defo worth a read. 💯
Real quick, let me copy this message 🫡 nostr:note1ucj6vekyrwhv2helawaaheddvpgfcec6k8tas5gue9tue0h08lsqvk955m
Some people believe it's theft because you're potentially undermining their ability to sell it. A big company can often produce your widget faster and distribute it better than you can (assuming you're a small company or an individual), thus it's not a fair competition to profit from the idea. Just providing the other side of the argument.
It is common to argue that intellectual property in the form of copyright and patent is necessary for the innovation and creation of ideas and inventions such as machines, drugs, computer software, books, music, literature and movies. In fact intellectual property is not like ordinary property at all, but constitutes a government grant of a costly and dangerous private monopoly over ideas. We show through theory and example that intellectual monopoly is not necessary for innovation and as a practical matter is damaging to growth, prosperity and liberty. http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/againstnew.htm
On copyrights and patents nostr:note1ucj6vekyrwhv2helawaaheddvpgfcec6k8tas5gue9tue0h08lsqvk955m
You know why it is not fun? Because the person creating the bicycle put life, energy, sacrificing pleasure and comfort, sometimes up to exhaustion in order to hold the space, to get the tools and to create it. One wanting to use it must help first the creator not for the object itself but for the humanity in them both, so that the creator can keep going after they have made something that makes your life more simple, beautiful, comfortable, pleasureful or whatever helps or give meaning to you. It is not theft but it is not fair neither. It is just predatorial. Like capitalism itself.
Copying without permission can be a theft of opportunity. If i write a book and you copy it and sell it cheaper or give it away free. You are depriving me of the opportunity to capitalize on my work.
