← Back to context

Comment by Quarrelsome

4 days ago

they're all a bit immoral, like how Hollywood made it big by avoiding patents, how YouTube got its mammoth exit via widespread copyright infringement and now LLMs gather up the skills of people it pays nothing to and tries to sell.

However we could also argue that most things in human society are less moral than moral (e.g. cars, supermarkets, etc).

But we can also argue that dropping some hundreds of millions in VC capital is less immoral than other activities, such as holding that money in liquid assets.

* Glares at Apple cosplaying Smaug *

Patents and copyrigt laws are immoral.

  • however they do result in flows of capitals feeding into otherwise unfundable enterprise like R&D; science and engineering, or culture; writing, music, art. Where's the ROI if you invest millions into R&D and your competitor invests $0 and can then just reproduce your works with their logo ontop of yours? To sack off IP and copyright would significantly narrow innovation and result in many artists, scientists and engineers having their income severely suppressed if not eradicated. Instead that money would temporarily go to a bunch of hacks that do nothing but copy and chase the bottom, before vanishing into thin air as the works become entirely unprofitable.

    I don't think its as simple as calling them immoral. Rather the immorality comes on them being poorly regulated. With regulated term limits on patents and copyright we create a world where an artist can create licensed product and protect themselves during the course of their career, and people are them able to riff on their works after some decades or after they pass on.

    • > I don't think its as simple as calling them immoral. Rather the immorality comes on them being poorly regulated

      I think if behavior needs to be regulated by government in order to be moral, then it's immoral behavior by default

      The regulation doesn't make it moral, the regulation only limits the damage by limiting how immoral you're allowed to be

      5 replies →

    • We can get rid of copyright, patents, trademarks and only have a new right called branding - it allows you to name the thing you invented/created.

      In the new world that's incentive for enough people to create. Let knowledge rein free.. bellowing through the lands.

      2 replies →

  • I think it's a little more nuanced than that. Certainly IP is regularly abused to try to suppress competition/innovation, own our shared culture, create artificial scarcity, etc. However, there's also a need to protect artists and other creatives from having their work scooped up and profited off of by mega corps.

    • You're taking a nuanced view of fundamental thing and completely missing the point.

      Copyright is bad like inheritance is bad. Arguing about good and bad industrialists is missing the point.

      16 replies →

> But we can also argue that dropping some hundreds of millions in VC capital is less immoral than other activities, such as holding that money in liquid assets.

It really depends a lot on how those liquid assets are deployed.

I agree that Apple should have probably done something with their cash hoard like maybe buying or bolstering Intel so that they could have a domestic supply of chips, but apparently Apple has decided that there's just not much else to do with that money right now that would give them a better return? We might not agree with that assessment, but it's hard to call it immoral.