Leave My Internet ALONE!!

Property rights are only necessary and justified for physically tangible things which cannot be utilized by more than one person at a time. Likewise, property rights are completely unnecessary and unjustified for intangible (imaginary) things which nobody can be deprived. It's a simple but important distinction. IP rights are a gross perversion of the fundamental concept of property and that is why governments must infringe upon all other rights to enforce them.

You're basically just parroting what jeroun said. It indicates you 2 don't do much in the way of critical thinking or reading of various opinions.

If IP is such a gross perversion, how come you have a historical continuum of legal thought on property, starting at least in ancient Greece, recognizing IP.

Suppose that IP isn't fundamental. It hasn't been demonstrated that it's illegitimate for the state to recognize IP through republican principles.

The answer to your question should be obvious. If there's enough money to be made, any excuse will do. The concept of IP was invented by lawyers, lawmakers and business men as an excuse to destroy competition in the free market and become rich to everyone else's impoverishment. It's as simple as that.

"If there's enough money to be made, any excuse will do."

Oh really? That's what the socialist said to the free market apologist.

"The concept of IP was invented by lawyers, lawmakers and business men"

And who codified systems of property to begin with. Lawyers.

So, I suppose it's your position that Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson didn't care about the free market. Good luck with that.

What are you talking about? I'm not a socialist.

@Piscivorus

0_0 0_o *palms face 10x*

Are you serious? (Re)read my previous comment.

You're really trying to play both sides of the fence here. What's happening here is you're picking out the functions of government you like, calling them legitimate contractual arrangements while discarding the ones you don't like. It's the classic game of tails I win, heads you lose.

You are correct to point out the right of the people to enforce the Natural Law, but that function can be outsourced. However, once the State is formed coercion is utilized commensurate with legitimacy, in order to enforce these rights. But this doesnt even begin to touch on other legitimate functions of government such as taxation to fund basic operating expenses courts and security forces. But perhaps you truly are an Anarchist. Who knows?

Im pretty sure Im not going to convince you, a priori that intellectual property is real property, but studying the historical conception of law is illuminating because history allows us to examine some continuity of what establishes natural rights to various civilizations. Forms of Patent law exist in Greece dating 500BC and in Roman Law, which influenced British Common Law. We see Patent protections in the Venetian Republic 15th century, and patent protections in Britain 17th century.

Adam Smith conceived of Intellectual property as true property and John Locke influenced its epistemic Justification with the, Labor Theory of Property Rights.
As early as the U.S. Articles of Confederation, States protected patent rights. Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution explicitly gives Congress the right to protect Intellectual property.
Thomas Jefferson played a pivotal role in the THE PATENT ACT OF 1793. You can call that a MYTH if you want, I call it empirical reality.