Comments on: The Mountain of IP Legislation

By: DixieFlatline

DixieFlatline — Fri, 26 Nov 2010 18:34:12 +0000

@Silas, successful troll is successful.

By: Michael A. Clem

Michael A. Clem — Thu, 25 Nov 2010 14:28:45 +0000

There’s nothing wrong with the general idea of courts–third party arbitration makes a lot of sense. The problem is in what type of law the courts are supporting, which in turn goes back to what is supporting the courts: government courts are supported by taxation and legislative appointments. Private courts are supported by their customers. Which type of court do you think is going to support the absurdities of IP?

By: Peter Surda

Peter Surda — Thu, 25 Nov 2010 10:31:31 +0000

I have proposed reciprocal damages for IP before. That does not require courts or shooting. If someone violates your IP, the appropriate reaction would be to violate his IP back, e.g. by libel or slander. I don’t see why IP proponents should object, since to them, imaginary property is either equivalent or superiour to physical property.

By: Stephan Kinsella

Stephan Kinsella — Thu, 25 Nov 2010 00:19:04 +0000

nice justification, statist sycophant! or as we say in libertarian–pathetic!

By: Dan McCarthy

Dan McCarthy — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 23:05:11 +0000

Shooting each other’s movies and making them better

By: Andras

Andras — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 21:50:22 +0000

What is the alternative to courts? Shooting each others?

By: Silas Barta

Silas Barta — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 19:44:20 +0000

Key physical property statutes and treaties:

Code of Hammurabi…