Different propositon here. If I build a house, I can sell it once. If I hit
a baseball, I can only make each hit once.
If I develop a unique product, I can sell it many times.
>> If I create a logo for my enterprise, should someone else be
>> permitted to use it to sell their products?
>That's a trademark, not a copyright or patent; an entirely unrelated
>issue. Using someone else's identity is willful fraud, and I have
>no problem with enforcing a tort in that case.
Okay, definition accepted. But use of a copied product as your own is also
fraud for the exact same reason.
>> I have no objection to others using my ideas to act as a springboard for
>> them to reach even greater heights. I only object to others using my
>> creations to deny me a chance to make a living by undercutting me with
>> duplicates of what I made.
>Then don't use business practices that encourage that. The present
>system is based on the assumption of copyright; without it, different
>business models would evolve. This is a good thing.
In today's world, I have no choice but to play by the rules of today's game.
Should your utopia become a reality, i will gladly adapt my views to
maximize my comfort level there.
>> Copying, however, is cheating. By your arguments, if I copy your doctoral
>> thesis, I should be able to claim the degree just as if I had done all the
>> research. After all, it's not 'theft'.
>Well, you could publish my thesis, but I presume that a college who
>granted degrees to people for using a Xerox machine would not have
>a very good reputation.
Yes, but how do you prevent people from claiming to be the original author
without some law or rule acknowleging the original maker?