Don't agree. It's exist, my idea is my idea. I doesn't mean you have to pay it, the payment is rely on me, because it is my idea. I will dicatate the rules. If you don't agree with the rules you have a right to not use my intellectual property.
Discussion
I wrote this in my reply to Mark on another branch of this thread. Agreed-upon rules seem the most fair:
“contractual agreements would help solve this: “I will sell you this content only if you agree not to redistribute it”. In that case, both parties have agreed on the terms of the transaction. If the buyer breaks the contract (ie burns 100 copies of the cd and sells them on the street), then the artist is entitled to seek damages.
Perhaps that’s the ethical boundary: civil litigation, not criminal penalty”
well, it is not me who speaks this but the Austrian school of economics, if you want to deepen about, I recommend you to research about. And I am sorry to inform you that Regardless of your opinion, intellectual property is impossible to secure in this day and age.
Don't agree. There are strict laws even harmonized in the whole world. See WIPO.
And the law enforcement is sctrict too, but inly that case if the owner (or the successor, other interested person) makes a lawsuit.
In US it is a civil suit or case, but e.g. in Hungary this is a crime.
BTW: I don't know what do yku mean under "Austrian school of econimics". Is is a specific thing?
I have nothing to do with Austria, that is another country
the law can only be enforced when the """criminal"""" does not use VPN. For anyone with the slightest knowledge these laws are equal to used toilet paper. And the Austrian school of economics is the economic foundation used in the development of Bitcoin.
Even if it’s “impossible to secure” IP rights, that wasn’t my original question.
Is sharing/profiting off of another creator’s work - in the context of torrenting - an ethical act? Is there an argument that demonstrates it being ethical?
This will be a fun read 🙏