Dezaad
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2005
- Messages
- 5,057
- Reaction score
- 2,424
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
Ummm Akhbar. You're imagining things if you think I set up a straw man as you. Here's the relevant conversation in full:Scarecrow Akhbar said:Yep, that's why I took on the handle Scarecrow is Great. So many people build strawmen out of what I say that they must really really love me.
I'm fully aware of what the constitution says in regards to patents and copyrights, yet you have to post what I didn't say and shadowbox with yourself.
Dezaad said:The purpose of copyright, as a construct, is to benefit society by arbitrarily defining ownership rights (please see the Constitution if you disagree that this is the purpose of copyright in America).
Akhbar said:That's socialist gobbledy-gook.
The purpose of copyrights, patents, and trademarks is to protect the financial interests of the individual possessing them.
D said:LOOK THE CONSTITUTION IS A SOCIALIST INSTRUMENT!!!
Don't believe me? Just ask Akhbar...
Well, here's what the Constitution says about why Congress was empowered to create the artifice in America:
The Congress shall have Power ...
Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
The Constitution clearly doesn't say:
The Congress shall have Power ...
Clause 8: To grant Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their work for the sake of protecting their financial interests;
Some people use the words "Socialist Gobledygook" far far too loosely. The founders, unfortunately, were not Socialists.
A said:Yep, that's why I took on the handle Scarecrow is Great. So many people build strawmen out of what I say that they must really really love me.
I'm fully aware of what the constitution says in regards to patents and copyrights, yet you have to post what I didn't say and shadowbox with yourself.
I didn't post anything as a direct quote that you didn't say, nor did I mischaracterize the nature of what you did say. Now I've posted what you did in fact say, and it comports perfectly with what I characterized you as saying. Talking about setting up straw men... are you sure you didn't name yourself that because you fancy yourself an artist at creating them? (not saying that anyone else thinks you're clever or anything).
In any case, not every law made for the benefit of society as a whole is infected with the 'disease of socialism', and that is all that the founders did: create an friendly environment in the sciences and arts; to benefit society.
As another transparent straw man that YOU set up:
I said:
Please explain why we as taxpayers should be forced to pay for the incarceration of people who engage in copyright infringement on artistic work?
Clearly, I didn't ask the question "What will happen if the law isn't enforced and people's intellectual property is not protected?" I requested an explanation of "What will happen if we fail to enforce copyrights on artistic work." You didn't answer that question, you answered your own. I didn't comment on this portion of your reply at the time because it did seem you were just arguing with yourself. That is, until you feebly made me out to be doing it.What will happen if the law isn't enforced and people's intellectual property is not protected? Well, I know a man who mortgaged his house, designed a helicopter in his living room, and now owns a 200 million dollar helicopter company based on his patents.
That's how patents, copyrights, and trademarks benefit "society". Frank certainly wouldn't have taken that risk if he wouldn't have been able to reap any rewards from it.