[an expanded comment made on Internet Evolution]
Even the most cursory study of history reveals that both of these state imposed monopolies have done more harm than good. How is it that we understand that monoplies are bad for us, yet swallow the idea they are somehow good when it comes to intellectual property?
For copyright, part of it is because the word itself implies it is a “right”, rather than a monopoly.
And the other part is the myth that copyright makes sure that creators get paid. Although some creators get paid nominal amounts sporadically, and a tiny percentage of star creators do well out of copyright, just enough goes to creators to help perpetuate the myth. The true beneficiaries are the few large powerful corporations that were built on the copyright monopoly, and, sadly, the copyright collectives. Although began with the best of intentions, today’s copyright collectives look out for their own interests first, before those of the creators they are supposed to safeguard.
Today the patent system is so corrupt we have had fire, the wheel, genetic material and mathematical equations “protected” by patents. Equally absurd, letters of the alphabet (R) and common words like face and book “protected” by trademark law (the third pillar of the IP Triumvirate).
The real purpose of patents and copyright is to establish and protect business monopoly, so businesses can make unreasonable profits, which can be achieved through stifling competitors who want to innovate. Thanks in no small part to today’s free press [the Internet], we are seeing more and more how effectively patents and copyright can be used to squelch innovation.
Corporate interests don’t *want* innovation unless they profit from it.
You know what they say, if you give a corporation a cookie . . .