Property rights are an essential parts of our civil liberties because in a very real sense, property rights are an extension – and confirmation – of the principle of self-ownership.
How can I be in favour of protecting property rights, but at the same time oppose the copyright industry?
It may seem like a contradiction, but a deeper look will reveal that copyright and property rights – though related – are not exactly one and the same thing.
Property is physical and material: it can only be possessed by one owner at a time. If I steal your DVD of a movie, you no longer have the ability to enjoy possessing it. By stealing, I have deprived you of possessing something. It is possible to justify a law that does not permit me to deprive you of some object against your will .
Ideas do not work in the same way. If I begin using your idea, I have not deprived you of the use of the idea: it’s still available for you to do with it what you please. But, is it reasonable to forbid me to think your idea and incorporate it into my own thoughts to produce a new idea or product?
Is that not a little too close to criminalizing thought?
One of my favourite YouTubers has re-surfaced, with a whole crop of most excellent videos!
VictimlessCriminal has brought us videos that warn of how the Lisbon Treaty lists pedophilia as a grounds on which a person may not be discriminated against, Islam’s attitude towards women and now, he has turned to looking at religions in general.
I cannot immediately find his videos from a few years ago, but he does have a latest series out, entitled ‘Religion is The Great Hijacker‘. His goal is not to argue agains belief in divine beings or indeed in trying to draw a distinction between theists and atheists. He states that, having been on both sides of that division, he regards it as more artificial than we would all like to think…
Rather, what he wants to do is to shine a light at what part of the human experience had been hijacked by religions and used to enforce its dogma, in order that we can take ownership of what is rightly ours.
‘Like all diamonds, the diamond used by the researchers has impurities — things other than carbon. The more impurities in a diamond, the less attractive it is as a piece of jewelry, because it makes the crystal appear cloudy.
The team, however, utilized the impurities themselves.
A rogue nitrogen nucleus became the first qubit. In a second flaw sat an electron, which became the second qubit. (Though put more accurately, the “spin” of each of these subatomic particles was used as the qubit.)’
Even though this video is a few years old (2009), I have only come accross it recently. It is also a little long, but it is interesting because it aprroaches the topic from the point of view of modern medicine in general and psychiatry in paricular.