RE: Let's talk about: Copyright

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Let's talk about: Copyright

apsu (65)in #photography • 7 years ago

Haha.

Are you here just to spew all kinds of gibberish without any contact to the reality?

7 years ago in #photography by apsu (65)

$0.00

2 votes

Sort:

Trending

[-]

baah (61) 7 years ago

Without any contact to the reality?

GO look up wikipedia Monopoly. It says this:

A government-granted monopoly or legal monopoly, by contrast, is sanctioned by the state, often to provide an incentive to invest in a risky venture or enrich a domestic interest group. Patents, copyrights, and trademarks are sometimes used as examples of government-granted monopolies. The government may also reserve the venture for itself, thus forming a government monopoly.[citation needed]

If you follow through and aren't a complete idiot, to Government-Granted monopoly (the hyperlink is built into the article, idiot)

In economics, a government-granted monopoly (also called a "de jure monopoly") is a form of coercive monopoly by which a government grants exclusive privilege to a private individual or firm to be the sole provider of a good or service; potential competitors are excluded from the market by law, regulation, or other mechanisms of government enforcement. As a form of coercive monopoly, government-granted monopoly is contrasted with a non-coercive monopoly or an efficiency monopoly, where there is no competition but it is not forcibly excluded. Amongst forms of coercive monopoly it is distinguished from government monopoly or state monopoly (in which government agencies hold the legally enforced monopoly rather than private individuals or firms) and from government-sponsored cartels (in which the government forces several independent producers to partially coordinate their decisions through a centralized organization). Advocates for government-granted monopolies often claim that they ensure a degree of public control over essential industries, without having those industries actually run by the state. Opponents often criticize them as political favors to corporations. Government-granted monopolies may be opposed by those who would prefer free markets as well as by those who would prefer to replace private corporations with public ownership.

Contact to "the" reality? You're here denying that there's no monopolizing on ideas when that is exactly what it is described as and that is not some exaggeration however mild because by function, or in other words HOW IT WORKS (idiot) is by exclusive right, which in the sense of exclusive right over making money from an idea is EXACTLY (idiot, there is no argument or interpretation or misunderstanding, it's an interchangeable context) what MONOPOLIZING (the FUNCTION) MEANS (DEFINITION, MEANING).

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

baah (61) 7 years ago

If you can demonstrate why and how that is gibberish without any contact to reality I will give you my account, this is the third time I challenged you. Tell me again how copyrighting isn't monopolizing on an idea.

$0.00

[-]

apsu (65) 7 years ago

Are you talking about copyright law of a single, specific country?

$0.10

1 vote

[-]

baah (61) 7 years ago

Actually, I am talking about the idea of exclusivity over reproducing an idea or copying it, or Monopolizing the copying of an idea you idiot. It's the same in every country where those Exclusive Rights are granted- State Granted Monopoly BY definition, as exclusive rights is exactly what Monopoly Means.

Tell me again how copyrighting isn't monopolizing on an idea.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

baah (61) 7 years ago

Idiot. Lmao.

There's no monopolizing on an Idea: it's only that I can hunt you down legally for infringing on my exclusive right to make money off MY idea. (claiming to own ideas. good one, lots of thought and reasons :I made it, it's mine, you cannot use it! .. why? loololoolol)

$0.00

1 vote