An exchange:
"An ounce of gold, mister, is worth what it is because of the human labor that went into the findin' and the gettin' of it." Howard from Treasure of the Sierra Madre..
Why can't you substitute your creative innovation in the sentence for gold? Doesn't your labor searching for creative ideas have the same value?
I too have been woefully misled by Hollywood movies. One factor in the gold price is scarcity due to the challenge of mining it, but Howard here is missing several other factors: gold won the contest of commodities which could be a medium of exchange, for the following factors; divisibility, universality, compactness, antibacterial, incorruptibility, among others.
The fact that if your creativity and innovation will not pay if it is not directed at serving others rather assures you will discipline yourself to serving others and not just play at whatever. My customers will feed back whether I am on track. They are paid for their perspicacity by my efficiency.
*** A medium of exchange emerges and one result is division of labor, the true test of wealth in a society.***
***Arrrggghhh... almost everything man has was created without IPR. The question is a non starter: the burden is on those who claim we must have IPR. They are the ones with no basis in fact, logic or experience. The initial investment in innovation is the billions of transactions that occur to make the status quo, in which the entrepreneur says..."I've got an idea..." the entrepreneurs idea is neither unique nor large. Small improvements (see Apple) are the most profitable. Who is "someone else?" What will they "steal?" To whom will they sell what they "steal."
How does the free market address this argument...
If there are no copyright/patent laws then businesses wouldn't have the incentive to invent anything. The initial investment in the act of innovating wouldn't be worth it if someone else could just steal the result of that investment.
The "someone else" must be psychic to be a problem. This psychic must be able to read your mind. they must also be clairvoyant, to see what moves you will make in the future, moves you have not even considered.
What will "they steal?" What you develop is through a process of hegelian dialectic: thesis, antithesis, synthesis. Since your adversary who you expect to steal from you must be working somewhat near your roll out date as his, he will have to stay abreast of your last minute changes, most of which are in your mind. Here again, believing in widespread paranormal activity is fundamental in a belief that IPR is necessary.
Their spy network would have to be legendary to track down and scope out your source network, not to mention your sales network. WE spend billions to find Osama bin Laden with no success. Your adversary will find your supplier? Say they do find your supplier... your supplier is keen on burning you, who has the bright ideas, to work with someone who merely steals other's ideas? Your supplier prefers bottom fishers with no customers to you who originates ideas and originates customers?
And once these paranormal activists have stolen your idea, they must consistently steal your new ideas as they form. Here again, it takes a heretofore unheard of haruspication to consistently overtime withdraw ideas from another's head, and therefore compete.
Look at this to see the real world. http://oldcomputers.net/. Check out Apple in particular. Their best designs, their leaps forward were times of most collaboration. Nothing was stolen, people just worked together.
Anyone could have done what Apple did. In fact, Sharp and Sony did do what Apple did, for Apple. People do what they do. To hold back for fear of someone stealing your idea is irrational.
Finally, to whom will the "thieves" sell their products? Do retailers esteem working with clairvoyants who steal ideas out of the heads of others... buy anything just to get a lower price?
In your book, you cite Tylenol (no patent) as the number one selling drug. Are there other examples?
0 comments:
Post a Comment