Unusual reflections on intellectual property rights
I assume, dear reader, that you began to read this note in order to enjoy the next grinding of copyies, to be surprised at the next brazen trick of copywriting, and maybe even trivially wanting, skipping a piece of text, the contents of which you already know 90% of, write 200-300 bytes stinging text. Alas, but I will not help you with this. I just want to share with you a very simple idea, which for some reason I haven’t met earlier in topics related to intellectual property. I want, following the principle: "Criticizing - offer," to offer. I want to lower the criticism. With criticism, everything is clear.
So, closer to the point:
We have a product (presumably useful).
Work was spent on its creation (presumably useful).
Useful work must be rewarded.
In the country of victorious socialism, we could even say how many resources it is necessary to reward the creators.
But in our most absurd of worlds, the creator can independently set the price.
Let be.
Let exposes. Price. Any The ultimate . Yes exactly. Not infinite , as it is now accepted, but a normal final price, upon receipt of which the creator loses any exclusive rights to the product. He has sold his product and is no longer the owner.
“Ha,” you will say, “And what will prevent the creator, hiding the evil imperialist grin, set a price of 100 ^ 500 money?”
Never mind.
But agree that the attitude of the consumer (the usual engineer-hard worker-bureaucrat) to a copywriter can change a little if a film with a budget of, say, a million money, will be billed in, say, a billion.
Here, a person completely distant from copy-space will ask himself: “But haven't the gentlemen of the good people been fucked?”.
We know the answer and so, but it will be good to eat it logically will bring for themselves the notorious 95%.
The masses are a great force, but alas, blinded by their greyness, the force is inactive.
What is required? Nothing at all - to add a few words to a law, indicating the price for a product is finite.
I said everything.
Thanks for attention.
So, closer to the point:
We have a product (presumably useful).
Work was spent on its creation (presumably useful).
Useful work must be rewarded.
In the country of victorious socialism, we could even say how many resources it is necessary to reward the creators.
But in our most absurd of worlds, the creator can independently set the price.
Let be.
Let exposes. Price. Any The ultimate . Yes exactly. Not infinite , as it is now accepted, but a normal final price, upon receipt of which the creator loses any exclusive rights to the product. He has sold his product and is no longer the owner.
“Ha,” you will say, “And what will prevent the creator, hiding the evil imperialist grin, set a price of 100 ^ 500 money?”
Never mind.
But agree that the attitude of the consumer (the usual engineer-hard worker-bureaucrat) to a copywriter can change a little if a film with a budget of, say, a million money, will be billed in, say, a billion.
Here, a person completely distant from copy-space will ask himself: “But haven't the gentlemen of the good people been fucked?”.
We know the answer and so, but it will be good to eat it logically will bring for themselves the notorious 95%.
The masses are a great force, but alas, blinded by their greyness, the force is inactive.
What is required? Nothing at all - to add a few words to a law, indicating the price for a product is finite.
I said everything.
Thanks for attention.
')
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/170391/
All Articles