Information Integrity as a Benefit of IP

[Eiuol]

I'm thinking about different practical reasons for IP, aside from just the moral reasons that IP is necessary to protect a person's creations and labor.

First, I want to briefly develop a premise that all property is a type of information essentially; a material quality is really just incidental of the time. Keep in mind I'm not talking about property transfer or still-owned property.

No property is in an object nor is having an object around you property. Something about the object has to be identified and harnessed in some manner. Needing to use something for it to even be property indicates that some knowledge is required. Touching an object won't tell you how to use it. Looking at a fossil on the beach won't make the fossil yours, because no amount of use is involved. However, once an idea involving use comes about, ownership is possible. You can bring it home for a collection, to study, to make a model, make jewelery, etc. What you own is a specific idea in application, whatever application you so choose. You have complete control over the distribution and use of an idea. Being a single fossil, only so much can really even be done. Without the fossil, there is no idea to apply. Also, the idea can't be generalized to the extent of “I own the use of any ancient set of bones in the soil.” The idea of making a model is limited in scope to only that fossil, as the origin of the idea only came from that specific fossil.

Early in human history, conceptions of property had little need to be expanded as a concept. Without data storage, property could only ever be material. There wasn't all that much to trade intellectually speaking. As information storage expanded, it became possible to have exact copies of items, with the stuff being copied essentially immaterial (a story isn't physical, but the book or scrolls it's on is). Books worked fine for a while; introduce movable type, you expand information storage further. Then automated presses to expand further. Build further, you've got computer representations of data, making copying simple and easy at faster rates than ever before in history.

As this technology builds, property moves away from being purely tangible like that fossil I mentioned. Information becomes more relevant as copying becomes easier. Distribution of information is possible, and not merely distribution of tangible goods. Prior to writing systems, there was only word of mouth. In addition, ideas are less dependent upon material items. A method to produce electricity is more than the observation of electricity; it's a specific way to use electricity that happens to be repeatable and copyable. Applying the idea leads to the creation of a kind of object with the same sort of specificity as the fossil. The further technology develops, the less relevant tangible property is. Or tangible property just provides less benefit in comparison to what can be accomplished by machines.

(Stopping here for a moment, if many libertarians are so adamant about IP being illegitimate, it seems to me that ultimately – if they're in support of technology – they implicitly want the abolition of property altogether. They certainly don't realize it.)

What I'm getting at is that the information integrity is one of the most important reasons to have IP recognized. Information integrity is almost a non-issue in tangible items, although physical integrity is important. When a guitar is stolen, the physical integrity is at risk because there is no guarantee to how the guitar will be used. Some degree of wear and tear will happen, to some extent decreasing the amount of time the guitar is usable. With software, wear and tear won't happen in a physical sense. You can download a video game illegitimately without any physical damage. But there is information decay in a different way. The idea, the video game, is being distributed with no guarantee to how the game will be used. Perhaps the information will be used to create Diablo 5 (yes, it exists...). To some extent, the Diablo games are degraded, or altered in a manner the creator never wanted. No kind of information involving method can be reproduced exactly. The code might, but not the design elements Blizzard develops for their Diablo games. Think about the game of telephone; the information doesn't reach the other end in the same condition. The more advanced the idea, quicker the idea decays in quality. Getting to the Diablo 5 expansion pack probably involved quite a bit of decay in standards Blizzard wants in good games.

IP results in maintenance of information integrity, just as tangible property results in physical integrity. By limiting the extent random people are permitted to use your ideas, you also prevent anyone from making trashy representations of your idea. To be able to use an idea, you'll have to have ideas of your own to trade. People in the game design field would have to care enough about doing good work, because real money is on the line. Coming up with a game someone would trade for means that to some extent, the game is good. People pirating games in China don't have anything on the line to make good representations of Diablo except a hard working attitude that may or may not be present. In a sense, IP keeps people focused on high quality originals. To build on ideas would require focusing on high quality originals, because the ideas need to be purchased or traded.

Also neat to mention is that by having to purchase IP, standards are promoted with that technology. I can't go off and make a freelance version of an Xbox with different software standards than Microsoft's Xbox. In order to develop products for Xbox, I have to use the specifications Microsoft uses. One product developed for Xbox will work for all Xboxes, helping both myself and Microsoft. A product for my freelance Xbox would only work on my version. And if my version became popular enough to compete with Microsoft's Xbox, there would be a compatibility gap, fragmenting the game industry. Not that the game industry would die, but that it would be less efficient and harder to develop advancements in game technology. By now, game consoles are becoming more homogeneous; the games themselves are more and more important than the console they can be played on. Years ago, consoles mattered a lot, but I'd say that was because people still had to discover what works best in terms of controls and graphic display.

Bottom line, IP is awesome because of the promotion of standards in an industry and support for information integrity.

Anyone have anything to add?

Edited September 20, 2011 by Eiuol

[Jorge]

A side note but something in your post interested me....

No property is in an object nor is having an object around you property. Something about the object has to be identified and harnessed in some manner. Needing to use something for it to even be property indicates that some knowledge is required. Touching an object won't tell you how to use it. Looking at a fossil on the beach won't make the fossil yours, because no amount of use is involved. However, once an idea involving use comes about, ownership is possible.

I own land inthe Annapolis Valley I have literally never stepped foot on through inheritance. A great deal of it has never been touched by civilized man, it still the wilderness it was when the Indians trampled through it. Do I somehow not own it? Must I give it up to the "First Nations Peoples" gobbling up everything in the province?

I am curious to know how this discussion of IP rights relate to land rights.

[Eiuol]

I own land in the Annapolis Valley I have literally never stepped foot on through inheritance. A great deal of it has never been touched by civilized man, it still the wilderness it was when the Indians trampled through it. Do I somehow not own it?

While this is a relevant question about property, it does not really have anything to do with IP promoting integrity of information or standardization of industries. I'm only interested here about what benefits IP provides besides just identifying the fruits of one's labor, in particular the kind of benefits I'm identifying.