“Intellectual property” in fact leads to escalation of conflict, the opposite of real property

Why is it that sometimes your society will respect your ownership claims to certain property?

“Physical objects bear an inherent conflict within themselves because of their physical properties: they can only be made up of specific atoms and occupy specific space and so cannot be owned multiple times at once. Avoiding the conflict that stems from those properties is advantageous from a pure game theory perspective. Life’s much easier if we don’t have to fight each other every second of every day. That’s where the idea of property and ownership come in. A community that didn’t respect SOME form of property consensus (even if it’s just “everything belongs to the high priest!”) would not get very far.
Legitimate property is therefore a tool for reducing conflict inherent in society. Things that are (in practical terms) abundant, like …(air when we are outdoors)… or a piece of publicly available knowledge, are not a source of conflict, therefore it makes no sense to call it anyone’s property. “Intellectual property” in fact leads to escalation of conflict, since it requires violent enforcement of unprovable claims against parts of established and otherwise uncontested property.”

  • Piotr Witold Von Fedorowski

http://falkvinge.net/2012/12/30/the-copyright-monopoly-is-a-legal-featherweight-compared-to-property-rights/

Advertisements