Abolish Intellectual Property

A thesis taken up and supported by Beppe Grillo, if I'm not mistaken. I remain very perplexed about this step in the reasoning: «When an innovator has the idea for a new product, they produce copies of it to put on sale: those copies of the idea are their property exactly like their socks, and they decide how many to sell and at what price. The sale always concerns and only concerns the copies: copies of an idea can be sold, not the idea itself».

I do not believe that the creator of something new is able to market the product of their idea and, perhaps, not even able to realize it (not always, at least). It seems to me like a very abstract scheme, from "grand systems"... You Ludovica, on the other hand, what do you think?

CromaDiBrera wrote:

Thesis taken up and supported by Beppe Grillo, if I'm not mistaken.

... it must come from somewhere, the important thing is to show off

CromaDiBrera wrote:

I remain very perplexed by this step in the reasoning: "When an innovator has the idea for a new product, they produce copies of it to put on sale: those copies of the idea are their property exactly like their socks, and they decide how many to sell and at what price. The sale always and only concerns the copies: copies of an idea can be sold, not the idea itself".

I do not believe that the creator of something new is able to market the product of their idea and, perhaps, not even realize it (not always, at least). It seems to me like a very abstract scheme, from "grand systems"... You Ludovica, instead, what do you think?

It must be placed within a more general discussion made by the book, and then the market does its part

Diciamo che ho trovato la lettura di questo testo interessante e anche curiosa...

Ludovica wrote:

Let's say I found the reading of this text interesting and also curious...

Thanks for the advice, interesting it certainly is.

It is also interesting that very often, if not always (I am not referring to the author of the book but to many figures who over the years have professed and continue to profess the free dissemination of every kind of "intellectual" creation), those who act as "spokespersons" for an ideal free market (and also exchange, above all) of creativity, have nothing to do with the creation or modification of music, screenplays, subjects, books, software, and whatever else you want; is it a coincidence that those who "fight" to "break down" the limits of copyright law regarding the free circulation of any "creative act," whether saleable or not—whether due to lack of interest or the will of the creator—are practically always those who benefit from it rather than the creator?

I think not, while maintaining that people, the majority of people, continue to fail to understand (because they also do it on purpose, in my opinion) the work behind a composition (not all of them, obviously), a software, a book, a painting, a sculpture, a set design, an idea (which very often, as Marco rightly says, a single person cannot produce and market—see patents regarding inventions of everyday objects; it is a battle to find someone willing to produce, and often one is forced to sell the patent abroad), there is indeed work involved, certainly pleasant, but not a waste of time or simply a pastime; to me, this is a lack of respect. Because if even (and here I think they are quite right) those who "produce" food products, certainly following and controlling the supply chain—for example regarding milk production, let's say the "simplest" product in terms of both quantity produced (poor cows, literally destroyed by intensive production, does anyone think about this? No) and (as stated) the method and timing of production, in this case it is the cow that produces the milk, as with other food products in other contexts—yet farmers use the term "we produce" (obviously implying they are not the ones producing the milk, but sometimes it sounds like there is a certain "presumption," for example in case of disasters or problems, when appealing to government aid) as if they were the "holders" of it.

Obviously the context is different, but why is it that so much is done to "save" Made in Italy (as they love to call it) in these cases, where everyone agrees, whereas when it comes to establishing the value of intellectual work outside certain contexts, there is a tendency to say "but it's just a hobby" or "what do you do for a living?"—people with various degrees continue to hear these rather heavy things, especially if the person is capable in addition to having the degree, obviously.