nostr:nprofile1qqst0mtgkp3du662ztj3l4fgts0purksu5fgek5n4vgmg9gt2hkn9lqpypmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuetfde6kuer6wasku7nfvuh8xurpvdjj7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxz7n6v9kk7tnwv46z7pxxtmh I think this logic breaks with Kinsellas IP. Example:
A breaks into B’s garage and discovers stolen bicycles. A calls C to inform them about the bicycles.
A: clearly violates property rights
C: however not, he just received information (IP), which he can then use as e wishes. That means C can use it as evidence or clue.
Or would you still disagree here? :)