Many of us, if not all are part of a big culture that downloads free or rather "illegal" stuff from the internet. We do so not because we don't support the livelihood of the particular producer, author, musician or actor - but because their new ideas are costly and almost unattainable. I think both sides know that we cannot go to either extremes - one of ruthless freeloaders and one of overbearing monopoly.
I feel this co-existance can be real, and can be improved - from efforts from both ends, and a respect to new ideas and the hardwork of the producer/inventors and consumers itself.
But first, we have to understand the differences between copyright, patents & trademarks.
1) Trademarks is the identifier of the providers of goods, services or ideas.
2) Patents is one of the two intellectual property. Patents apply to specific implementation of ideas. Generally short-termed and non permanant. Provide wide coverage protection.
3) Copyright is the second of the two intellectual property. Copyrights only protect the specific details of a particular narrative. They are longer-termed than patents.
The patent, which is the right to buy and sell copies of ideas and copyright law, the right to control how other people make use of these copies. The issue of the owner being able to control over their content after sale is controversial. To put it in Mr Faizal's terms - it's like writing a document on Microsoft Word and the owner is not you, but Microsoft. The rights of the owners are over-emphasized, while the consumers have very little ownership over their purchase.
What would the world be without this monopoly of intellectual property? Will information be like charity, and the hardwork of these producers thrown out the window like charity? Or will there be a stop to the innovation and new flow of ideas, that help not only our economies but improve our technology? Will we be a society that just takes, and not give in any sort of way?
I agree copyrights and patents are limiting but they serve to protect the work of others. We should respect them for the order of the world of invention might fall and never see the light again. I like new inventions, new form of ideas - and I cannot see this monopoly as evil. Limiting yes, but evil? That's a bit harsh. I feel we always think that enforcement are bad, but the truth is - its difficult work to sustain what is true, of value and worthy of protection.
What do you think?
Based on the article: Boldrin & Levine: Against Intellectual Monopoly <http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/anew01.pdf>
