i am sure he would be among the first to say that i am an idiot and eloquently describe me as so, but please read this and tell me why you think you know better than he does:
That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property. Society may give an exclusive right to the profits arising from them, as an encouragement to men to pursue ideas which may produce utility, but this may or may not be done, according to the will and convenience of the society, without claim or complaint from anybody. Accordingly, it is a fact, as far as I am informed, that England was, until we copied her, the only country on earth which ever, by a general law, gave a legal right to the exclusive use of an idea. In some other countries it is sometimes done, in a great case, and by a special and personal act, but, generally speaking, other nations have thought that these monopolies produce more embarrassment than advantage to society; and it may be observed that the nations which refuse monopolies of invention, are as fruitful as England in new and useful devices. - Letter to Isaac McPherson, August 13, 1813
while one could maybe interpret his statement to mean that a small amount of ip legislation is okay or even yields some new and useful devices occasionally, i dont see how anyone could think the ip system we have now improves the quality of life more than the no ip would
and ben franklin believed that ip held up advancement of humanity. john carmack is at least mostly opposed to ip. tesla opposed ip. so 4 of the smartest men to ever live thought that ip was not necessary for new and useful devices. and i realize that thomas edison loved ip, but i think that may have been because he wanted quick easy money
That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property. Society may give an exclusive right to the profits arising from them, as an encouragement to men to pursue ideas which may produce utility, but this may or may not be done, according to the will and convenience of the society, without claim or complaint from anybody. Accordingly, it is a fact, as far as I am informed, that England was, until we copied her, the only country on earth which ever, by a general law, gave a legal right to the exclusive use of an idea. In some other countries it is sometimes done, in a great case, and by a special and personal act, but, generally speaking, other nations have thought that these monopolies produce more embarrassment than advantage to society; and it may be observed that the nations which refuse monopolies of invention, are as fruitful as England in new and useful devices. - Letter to Isaac McPherson, August 13, 1813
while one could maybe interpret his statement to mean that a small amount of ip legislation is okay or even yields some new and useful devices occasionally, i dont see how anyone could think the ip system we have now improves the quality of life more than the no ip would
and ben franklin believed that ip held up advancement of humanity. john carmack is at least mostly opposed to ip. tesla opposed ip. so 4 of the smartest men to ever live thought that ip was not necessary for new and useful devices. and i realize that thomas edison loved ip, but i think that may have been because he wanted quick easy money
he wasnt any more of a hypocrite than most other people. george washington only supported independence because he got burned by tariffs, then the first thing he did as president was not only start tariffs over here, he then raised them 2 more times.
Facebook
Twitter