Things like rent won’t be so expensive because landlords will have less of an excuse to charge customers more money. So, in essence you’re not even arguing for compensating creators for their work; you’re arguing for compensating their feudal lords.
when one of those much bigger corporations you seem to hate simply steal their work and profit off of it?
Corporations will also make less money because there are no copyright and patent laws. Your cognitive dissonance is on full display here.
This is how we put more money in the hands of the working class. It’'s sad watching you fight tooth and nail against it just as you’ve been conditioned to do.
I’m not moving any goalposts nor am I making any assumptions. You are upset because rather than learn from your cognitive dissonance, you attack the person who calls it out.
Also leave you naive childish and idiotic anti-whatever proselytizing for you racist uncle over thanksgiving dinner.
Hey, you’re the one who’s arguing to exacerbate the disparity in wealth. Not me.
My original comment was about protecting intellectual property from theft, you responded with some bullshit about landlords charging too much rent which has nothing to do with intellectual theft. That is a textbook definition of moving the goal post.
Then you made assumptions about what I may or may not believe or think.
And now in this most recent comment you are asserting something that I did not say. I’m not arguing for or against the disparity in wealth.
Are you going to address my question? How do you propose that people who create intellectual property be compensated for their property? How do you propose you protect these people from intellectual theft? Please refrain from responding with anything other than the answer to this question I want you to propose a mechanism that will protect people from intellectual theft.
ONCE AGAIN THIS IS ABOUT INTELLECTUAL THEFT.
Also stop using the term cognitive dissonance you clearly have no clue what it means.
Things like rent won’t be so expensive because landlords will have less of an excuse to charge customers more money. So, in essence you’re not even arguing for compensating creators for their work; you’re arguing for compensating their feudal lords.
Corporations will also make less money because there are no copyright and patent laws. Your cognitive dissonance is on full display here.
This is how we put more money in the hands of the working class. It’'s sad watching you fight tooth and nail against it just as you’ve been conditioned to do.
You’re moving the goal posts and making assumptions.
Please address my question how do you propose any intellectual entity be compensated to their creator without any kind of theft protection?
Also leave you naive childish and idiotic anti-whatever proselytizing for you racist uncle over thanksgiving dinner.
I’m not moving any goalposts nor am I making any assumptions. You are upset because rather than learn from your cognitive dissonance, you attack the person who calls it out.
Hey, you’re the one who’s arguing to exacerbate the disparity in wealth. Not me.
Ok. Fine. I’ll bite.
My original comment was about protecting intellectual property from theft, you responded with some bullshit about landlords charging too much rent which has nothing to do with intellectual theft. That is a textbook definition of moving the goal post.
Then you made assumptions about what I may or may not believe or think.
And now in this most recent comment you are asserting something that I did not say. I’m not arguing for or against the disparity in wealth.
Are you going to address my question? How do you propose that people who create intellectual property be compensated for their property? How do you propose you protect these people from intellectual theft? Please refrain from responding with anything other than the answer to this question I want you to propose a mechanism that will protect people from intellectual theft.
ONCE AGAIN THIS IS ABOUT INTELLECTUAL THEFT.
Also stop using the term cognitive dissonance you clearly have no clue what it means.