Being a photographer intellectual property rights are something that I have a bit of a soft spot for. I understand the argument against it, but I also see it from a different perspective. Basically the way I see it is that intellectual property rights are useful if someone is going to use something you have put hard work into creating in order to generate a profit for themselves. It's basically like you building a house, then someone using that house to run a business, but not compensating you in any way for the use of the house you built. Anyhow I just thought I'd put my two cents in, funny picture though and I upvoted too :)
I agree in that example it is theft, as that other person is taking away your ability to use the house that you built.
In the case of intellectual property however, like a photograph, someone else using that photo in no way stops you from using it.
Also, as a photographer, the "intellectual property" you would be claiming would in itself be theft of other people's IP much of the time, if taking pictures which include buildings, cars, events, etc. that other people have created.
If someone who has a lot more resources, money and reach uses a photo that I have created it could completely overshadow any attempt I might make to use it myself. What if someone spent months creating a beautiful painting, then the coca cola company came and made copies of it, put it on international ads, sold it for pennies all over the world and didn't pay the artist anything? Do you think that is fair to the artist who created that work? What if the photograph is of a person who consented to have their picture taken, or is simply a nature photograph, which most are. The fact is if you have worked hard to create something worthwhile and someone else takes it for their own benefit, that is theft, despite the fact that you are still able to use it yourself.
So if someone comes along and builds walls all around your house with only one unmarked entrance that leads through a maze they are still able to use that house right? That's not theft and you arent preventing the person from using their house for purely hypothetical profit. They can still access and use the house. They can still advertise their home business. That house will be hidden behind walls with an obscure and hard to find entrance, with only ads for the company that built the walls, but you can still use it. Fair right?
Let me put it to you this way then @kennyskitchen: From now on I am going to copy/paste every post that you put up on Steemit, as soon as you post it. I'm going to take that content and put it up on my blog, as my content. I'm not going to mention you or that you created it, and I'm going to flag your original content to hide it, which I can since my rep is higher than yours. You'll likely make nothing for your posts, and I'll collect all the rewards. Does that sound fair to you? I mean, I haven't actually taken anything from you right? You still own that content, and you can continue to use it however you want. Kinda sounds like using the thing someone has created, putting up a wall so others can't see the original, and hiding the entrance to it behind a maze doesnt it? But it's totally cool with you if I do that with your Steemit content right?
Let me put it to you this way then @kennyskitchen: From now on I am going to copy/paste every post that you put up on Steemit, as soon as you post it. I'm going to take that content and put it up on my blog, as my content. I'm not going to mention you or that you created it, and I'm going to flag your original content to hide it, which I can since my rep is higher than yours. You'll likely make nothing for your posts, and I'll collect all the rewards. Does that sound fair to you? I mean, I haven't actually taken anything from you right? You still own that content, and you can continue to use it however you want. Kinda sounds like using the thing someone has created, putting up a wall so others can't see the original, and hiding the entrance to it behind a maze doesnt it? But it's totally cool with you if I do that with your Steemit content right?
Again, I do not care what you do with anything after I have put it out into the world. It is open to everyone at that point, as is everything else on the internet.
This new hypothetical you've come up with involves using fraud: flagging content that does not violate any TOS or any other agreements, and is once again NOT related to intellectual property.
I own every image I've created on my blog. Well over one hundred images and counting. I can guarantee you, no army will be fighting for me. I'm just one person with some private property which I allow the world to see. I don't see why the independent small time artists have to suffer because there is a group of people who want to stick it to the corporations who have a stranglehold on the arts and make it nearly impossible for someone like me to get anywhere with my product. Those rights are there to protect someone like me, but are abused by corporations and government. It would be nice if people could see the difference instead of assuming I'm an evil, greedy corporation because I want to make money from my craft.
Those "rights" were created by government/corporations (different pieces of the same system) in order to centralize knowledge & power, keep up the illusion of scarcity (even of ideas, HA!), and help the owner-class to reap the benefits of the labor & energy of others.
For someone to copy "intellectual property", they simply make a duplicate of something that exists: burn a copy of a CD, save an image, download a movie... This in no way involves taking anything from the "owner", there is no violation of the non-aggression principle here. For someone to enforce "intellectual property" laws, the initiation of force is required. Hence the word enforce...
Well, my images and words are a creation of mine which I own with the hopes of being able to earn money in exchange for my time. If a corporation were to come along and steal my work, I have the right to sue them for damages with enough evidence in place to prove that it's my work. People save my images all the time. Most of them are lower quality and don't even compare to the original high quality. These are more like samplers. If people today respected an independent artists efforts as legitimate work, I wouldn't have to spend more time creating the samplers and marking them. Still, no army is ever going to come along and enforce my right to own something I produced with my time.
Right, but I don't live in a theoretical world. I live in this one. In this world, if one band writes a song, then hears about another band performing their song down the street the next weekend, the first band hears about this, from people who have their back. This angers the first band. They go to the club and beat the shit out of the second band for being sleazy little scumbags who lack talent. The first band goes to jail, the second band has black eyes, broken noses and needs to find their own way to make money.
Your meme, how about I just go share that on my blog and make a fast buck. Then I'll wait for you to make more, and do it again. You'll just take that up the butt right? You won't be a tad angry with me?
I won't do that to you though, I give you my word as an honest man. I respect what's yours. I'll even give you a vote for your efforts.
Your example sounds about exactly right. The state has a monopoly on violence, and does not take kindly to others taking it's business into their own hands. If that first band had "gone to court" and asked the state to use violence for them, for a cut of the profits of course, then they would "win", because they are playing along with the way the mafia likes things done.
I don't know if you've noticed, but there isn't any music today that isn't using chords, melodies, or direct samples of music from the past. Just as with any human idea, nobody can own it. If it has popped up in your brain, then it is already in the collective consciousness, and you can guarantee that someone else has already thought of it too, someone else is right now, and more people will in the future. Just look at the cases of people from around the world submitting patents for the same ideas at about the same time. This practice of "owning" ideas is just a bunch of ridiculous ego masturbation, holding back humanity from advancing by keeping information locked away and using violence (the state) to go after those who come up with it later, hear about it, or otherwise work on the same thing.
You can do whatever the hell you'd like with this meme, that's why I put it on the internet, so as many people as possible can use it if they'd like. It's the exact same with everything else that I put online, I am sharing it in the hopes that others will find entertainment, education, or empowerment from it. You can in no way injure me by copying the work I did, you are helping me by spreading those ideas.
I still insist that I do not live in a theoretical society. You're using straw man arguments and spin to support a side of an argument designed to hold someone like me back from finding success in life with the cards I have been dealt. You're not satisfied with corporations and government and failing to see the difference between me and my private property vs those people and their private property. I'm under the impression you fail to accept the people working in government or corporations as part of humanity and even worse, lesser beings than yourself.
I am not hurting anyone by saying, "I've created this image and would like to sell it some day." I've never sold a piece of art, but I would like to some day.
I'm willing to face the fact that many different types of people exist in this world and some might want to take my work and use it to their benefit so I feel I must take steps to protect my property to limit their chance of causing harm to myself, my family and our livelihood. I am smart enough to know I must manipulate my environment in ways that work to my advantage. If I see an entity out there finding success using a few legal loopholes, I will do it too. I will not allow anyone to have an unfair advantage over me. To me, saying I own my images is no different than working the soil to plant the apple orchard.
This world requires money to survive whether people like it or not and that concept has nothing to do with me or what I believe. I don't care what other people think. I have mouths to feed and I don't feel it's an easy out to sell my crafts on the open market. Others earn money and are allowed to spend it on what they choose to spend it on. I was born into this world not by choice. If someone were to give me a fair trade for my art, I'd consider their offer. To me, there's no difference between having money to buy an apple vs having a product to trade for an apple. In the end I'm met with the same result.
You've embraced the concept of IP every step of the way today until you used it to tell me how you feel. I can respect your thought process but it would make more sense if you invented your own device or at least reversed engineered something out of available parts to tell me your views. You've created a modern form of art on this day for financial gain, much like I would like to do. Much of my work does not require a template though.
When you use the argument that I cannot own my images or thought process because someone else thought of it at the exact same time, I'll simply point you to google and tell you to enter in the term Haffanower. It has been nearly two months and still every result on google has something to do with me. Art has forms. A sonnet is a sonnet because that is it's form, not because everyone else is thinking with the same thought patterns. They use a template, much like your meme and follow a procedure in order to achieve the acceptable form.
Music is an art form as well. If you'd like to be a successful hip hop artist, you will fail miserably if you bring along an 80's hair band and start singing country. There are certain rules to follow if you'd like fit into a category. Your lifestyle is much the same.
I will not enforce my ways on you, please do not enforce your ways on me. Just because I use a proven business model, this does not make me the person you hate for inventing it. I am a true free thinker. I do not come equipped with a certain appearance and a particular script to follow. You will never find me among a group of people chanting the same thing. You will see me off in the distance, observing. While everyone is busy being right and wrong, I'm over there, being myself. I've heard everything you and those who guided you towards being you have to say. Many times. When I was young, I nearly followed the same herd. Later, when mp3's came around, I'd use the same arguments to justify my behavior and make myself feel better for downloading them.
I no longer dress a certain way, think a certain way or act a certain way. I have nothing to prove to anyone and don't require a team to back me up. I'm also not in the business of making enemies. If someone wants to feel the way they feel about something, all the power to them, so long as it doesn't get in my way or cause harm.
I visited the website on your image and I can sense the humor. I get the joke. I also see the potential to make money. Only $16 dollars for that flag. Strikingly similar to the business model I'd prefer to use. I also see disclaimers and legalese. I do not allow forms of media to pull the wool over my eyes. I do not allow forms of governance and political parties to influence my beliefs. That is what I see there. I choose to walk alone and don't usually see the need to explain myself. I've made an exception today.
You have my respect and I wish you all the best today.
Most of what you've said here has absolutely nothing to do with intellectual property, or the discussion of a stateless world versus the current system.
You're not satisfied with corporations and government...
There is no question of satisfaction or lack of here, the state is violence, and violence is immoral. Period. It's that simple.
...failing to see the difference between me and my private property vs those people and their private property.
If we're talking about the current world, not a hypothetical, then you have no private property, as anything you would consider such can be taken away from you at any time if you violate the "rules" of the state. At best, you are allowed to use these things as long as you're a good slave.
I'm under the impression you fail to accept the people working in government or corporations as part of humanity and even worse, lesser beings than yourself.
What were you just saying about logical fallacies? First, if you took a second to read/listen to ANYTHING on my blog, you would know that I love every human equally, and my goal is to remind as many as possible of the power that they have, which is stolen from them by states/corporations (distinction without a difference). The problem we are dealing with is one of systems/institutions and cultural programming. I would guess that less than .01% of people who work for governments have every made a conscious decision to receive their income from theft & violence, as they have been conditioned to see the state as a "good" thing... An illusion that takes 12+ years of indoctrination camps, mass media, and psychotropic drugs to maintain.
This world requires money to survive whether people like it or not and that concept has nothing to do with me or what I believe.
Humans require to survive:
food
water
shelter from extreme conditions
human contact
Humans can't eat or drink money, they can't shelter themselves from a storm with money, they certainly can't get a hug from money. Money is only needed if one is incapable of being self-sufficient. Food comes from seeds, soil, sunlight, and water. Water comes from the sky and the ground. Shelter comes from a natural resource + your time & energy. The only reason people think these things depend on money is... you guessed it, that same cultural programming designed to keep them dependent on a class of middle-men, who profit off of their energy.
Throughout this, you have confused intellectual property for physical property. If you paint a portrait, and I come take it from you, I have clearly removed something from your possession. If, however, you post pictures of that portrait online, thousands of people all copying that image has in no way effected lessened what you have.
My food, water, shelter costs money. I live on a farm and produce my own food, which also costs money.
I embrace the comforts of modern living. It's winter half of the year here. I use two sources of fire to keep warm. Wood and gas, both cost money.
It's Steemit standard practice to credit sources. I made my images, I must credit myself. People who use them ask first and give me credit. I'm fine with this. I feel it's fair.
I said I was "under the impression." I don't mind being wrong.
Most of what I said was in response to your response.
I don't feel it's necessary to check your background before I respond to your words.
I'm not a slave because I do not see the world the way you do.
I still insist I do not live in a theoretical society.
No matter how you spin this world, it will not have an effect me or my outlook on life.
I'm not in the business of making enemies.
Not everyone will agree with you. I still value your opinion.
I'm confident with how I see things and feel no desire to convince anyone that I'm right.
I know that I cannot eat money, please don't assume I am a moron.
I have no reason to be afraid of a government or a corporation.
This is an oxy-moron. A sovereign is "supreme, ruler, master", one who owns themself. A citizen is a subject, a slave, a lesser class.
My food, water, shelter costs money. I live on a farm and produce my own food, which also costs money. I embrace the comforts of modern living. It's winter half of the year here. I use two sources of fire to keep warm. Wood and gas, both cost money.
Again, none of these things come from money, money cannot create these things, money can only be used to get them from someone else if you are unable/unwilling to do so yourself.
I'm not a slave because I do not see the world the way you do.
Nope. Someone is, however, a slave if they don't own their own body (all citizens of nation-states)
I have no reason to be afraid of a government or a corporation.
Nobody said you should be, simply that they exist PURELY on the foundation of having a monopoly on violence.
You can do whatever the hell you'd like with this meme, that's why I put it on the internet, so as many people as possible can use it if they'd like. It's the exact same with everything else that I put online, I am sharing it in the hopes that others will find entertainment, education, or empowerment from it. You can in no way injure me by copying the work I did, you are helping me by spreading those ideas.
This was your response to me asking how you'd feel if I took your efforts and presented them as my own. What if I do not support your values and only stole your work because I see it makes money? If I was just using you as a vessel to fatten my bank account, would that sit well with you?
Like it or not, the common person is allowed to use their government granted rights in their favor, to protect their work from abusive actions. Yes, it seems greedy when a record label making millions of dollars per year enforces their rights. I've made nearly $300. I don't feel greedy when I say my work is my work and my efforts exist in physical form. Producing and processing an image is a labor of love and takes a lot of time. I don't even ask for money here, it just comes with the territory. An independent artist on Steemit actually has a fighting chance to be able to make money. This place removes the greedy corporation and the stigma attached to owning the final product. An artist isn't out to harm people or be violent, yet many people are out to take advantage of us. I don't feel that is fair.
This was your response to me asking how you'd feel if I took your efforts and presented them as my own. What if I do not support your values and only stole your work because I see it makes money? If I was just using you as a vessel to fatten my bank account, would that sit well with you?
Just like I said in the response you quoted right above this: "You can in no way injure me by copying the work I did"
Also, this piece right here is the programming that I mentioned many times above:
their government granted rights
Government does not and cannot grant rights. It can only infringe on them.
Being a photographer intellectual property rights are something that I have a bit of a soft spot for. I understand the argument against it, but I also see it from a different perspective. Basically the way I see it is that intellectual property rights are useful if someone is going to use something you have put hard work into creating in order to generate a profit for themselves. It's basically like you building a house, then someone using that house to run a business, but not compensating you in any way for the use of the house you built. Anyhow I just thought I'd put my two cents in, funny picture though and I upvoted too :)
I agree in that example it is theft, as that other person is taking away your ability to use the house that you built.
In the case of intellectual property however, like a photograph, someone else using that photo in no way stops you from using it.
Also, as a photographer, the "intellectual property" you would be claiming would in itself be theft of other people's IP much of the time, if taking pictures which include buildings, cars, events, etc. that other people have created.
If someone who has a lot more resources, money and reach uses a photo that I have created it could completely overshadow any attempt I might make to use it myself. What if someone spent months creating a beautiful painting, then the coca cola company came and made copies of it, put it on international ads, sold it for pennies all over the world and didn't pay the artist anything? Do you think that is fair to the artist who created that work? What if the photograph is of a person who consented to have their picture taken, or is simply a nature photograph, which most are. The fact is if you have worked hard to create something worthwhile and someone else takes it for their own benefit, that is theft, despite the fact that you are still able to use it yourself.
If you still have it, it has not been stolen from you. You are claiming the theft of purely hypothetical profit.
So if someone comes along and builds walls all around your house with only one unmarked entrance that leads through a maze they are still able to use that house right? That's not theft and you arent preventing the person from using their house for purely hypothetical profit. They can still access and use the house. They can still advertise their home business. That house will be hidden behind walls with an obscure and hard to find entrance, with only ads for the company that built the walls, but you can still use it. Fair right?
Walls, houses, mazes... NONE of these things are remotely related to intellectual property.
Let me put it to you this way then @kennyskitchen: From now on I am going to copy/paste every post that you put up on Steemit, as soon as you post it. I'm going to take that content and put it up on my blog, as my content. I'm not going to mention you or that you created it, and I'm going to flag your original content to hide it, which I can since my rep is higher than yours. You'll likely make nothing for your posts, and I'll collect all the rewards. Does that sound fair to you? I mean, I haven't actually taken anything from you right? You still own that content, and you can continue to use it however you want. Kinda sounds like using the thing someone has created, putting up a wall so others can't see the original, and hiding the entrance to it behind a maze doesnt it? But it's totally cool with you if I do that with your Steemit content right?
Again, I do not care what you do with anything after I have put it out into the world. It is open to everyone at that point, as is everything else on the internet.
This new hypothetical you've come up with involves using fraud: flagging content that does not violate any TOS or any other agreements, and is once again NOT related to intellectual property.
Also, thanks for the upvote :-)
Funniest thing I've seen all day!
Thanks @tommycordero!
I own every image I've created on my blog. Well over one hundred images and counting. I can guarantee you, no army will be fighting for me. I'm just one person with some private property which I allow the world to see. I don't see why the independent small time artists have to suffer because there is a group of people who want to stick it to the corporations who have a stranglehold on the arts and make it nearly impossible for someone like me to get anywhere with my product. Those rights are there to protect someone like me, but are abused by corporations and government. It would be nice if people could see the difference instead of assuming I'm an evil, greedy corporation because I want to make money from my craft.
Those "rights" were created by government/corporations (different pieces of the same system) in order to centralize knowledge & power, keep up the illusion of scarcity (even of ideas, HA!), and help the owner-class to reap the benefits of the labor & energy of others.
For someone to copy "intellectual property", they simply make a duplicate of something that exists: burn a copy of a CD, save an image, download a movie... This in no way involves taking anything from the "owner", there is no violation of the non-aggression principle here. For someone to enforce "intellectual property" laws, the initiation of force is required. Hence the word enforce...
Well, my images and words are a creation of mine which I own with the hopes of being able to earn money in exchange for my time. If a corporation were to come along and steal my work, I have the right to sue them for damages with enough evidence in place to prove that it's my work. People save my images all the time. Most of them are lower quality and don't even compare to the original high quality. These are more like samplers. If people today respected an independent artists efforts as legitimate work, I wouldn't have to spend more time creating the samplers and marking them. Still, no army is ever going to come along and enforce my right to own something I produced with my time.
Right, but I don't live in a theoretical world. I live in this one. In this world, if one band writes a song, then hears about another band performing their song down the street the next weekend, the first band hears about this, from people who have their back. This angers the first band. They go to the club and beat the shit out of the second band for being sleazy little scumbags who lack talent. The first band goes to jail, the second band has black eyes, broken noses and needs to find their own way to make money.
Your meme, how about I just go share that on my blog and make a fast buck. Then I'll wait for you to make more, and do it again. You'll just take that up the butt right? You won't be a tad angry with me?
I won't do that to you though, I give you my word as an honest man. I respect what's yours. I'll even give you a vote for your efforts.
Your example sounds about exactly right. The state has a monopoly on violence, and does not take kindly to others taking it's business into their own hands. If that first band had "gone to court" and asked the state to use violence for them, for a cut of the profits of course, then they would "win", because they are playing along with the way the mafia likes things done.
I don't know if you've noticed, but there isn't any music today that isn't using chords, melodies, or direct samples of music from the past. Just as with any human idea, nobody can own it. If it has popped up in your brain, then it is already in the collective consciousness, and you can guarantee that someone else has already thought of it too, someone else is right now, and more people will in the future. Just look at the cases of people from around the world submitting patents for the same ideas at about the same time. This practice of "owning" ideas is just a bunch of ridiculous ego masturbation, holding back humanity from advancing by keeping information locked away and using violence (the state) to go after those who come up with it later, hear about it, or otherwise work on the same thing.
You can do whatever the hell you'd like with this meme, that's why I put it on the internet, so as many people as possible can use it if they'd like. It's the exact same with everything else that I put online, I am sharing it in the hopes that others will find entertainment, education, or empowerment from it. You can in no way injure me by copying the work I did, you are helping me by spreading those ideas.
That's also why I put this image on my blogs & such.
I still insist that I do not live in a theoretical society. You're using straw man arguments and spin to support a side of an argument designed to hold someone like me back from finding success in life with the cards I have been dealt. You're not satisfied with corporations and government and failing to see the difference between me and my private property vs those people and their private property. I'm under the impression you fail to accept the people working in government or corporations as part of humanity and even worse, lesser beings than yourself.
I am not hurting anyone by saying, "I've created this image and would like to sell it some day." I've never sold a piece of art, but I would like to some day.
I'm willing to face the fact that many different types of people exist in this world and some might want to take my work and use it to their benefit so I feel I must take steps to protect my property to limit their chance of causing harm to myself, my family and our livelihood. I am smart enough to know I must manipulate my environment in ways that work to my advantage. If I see an entity out there finding success using a few legal loopholes, I will do it too. I will not allow anyone to have an unfair advantage over me. To me, saying I own my images is no different than working the soil to plant the apple orchard.
This world requires money to survive whether people like it or not and that concept has nothing to do with me or what I believe. I don't care what other people think. I have mouths to feed and I don't feel it's an easy out to sell my crafts on the open market. Others earn money and are allowed to spend it on what they choose to spend it on. I was born into this world not by choice. If someone were to give me a fair trade for my art, I'd consider their offer. To me, there's no difference between having money to buy an apple vs having a product to trade for an apple. In the end I'm met with the same result.
You've embraced the concept of IP every step of the way today until you used it to tell me how you feel. I can respect your thought process but it would make more sense if you invented your own device or at least reversed engineered something out of available parts to tell me your views. You've created a modern form of art on this day for financial gain, much like I would like to do. Much of my work does not require a template though.
When you use the argument that I cannot own my images or thought process because someone else thought of it at the exact same time, I'll simply point you to google and tell you to enter in the term Haffanower. It has been nearly two months and still every result on google has something to do with me. Art has forms. A sonnet is a sonnet because that is it's form, not because everyone else is thinking with the same thought patterns. They use a template, much like your meme and follow a procedure in order to achieve the acceptable form.
Music is an art form as well. If you'd like to be a successful hip hop artist, you will fail miserably if you bring along an 80's hair band and start singing country. There are certain rules to follow if you'd like fit into a category. Your lifestyle is much the same.
I will not enforce my ways on you, please do not enforce your ways on me. Just because I use a proven business model, this does not make me the person you hate for inventing it. I am a true free thinker. I do not come equipped with a certain appearance and a particular script to follow. You will never find me among a group of people chanting the same thing. You will see me off in the distance, observing. While everyone is busy being right and wrong, I'm over there, being myself. I've heard everything you and those who guided you towards being you have to say. Many times. When I was young, I nearly followed the same herd. Later, when mp3's came around, I'd use the same arguments to justify my behavior and make myself feel better for downloading them.
I no longer dress a certain way, think a certain way or act a certain way. I have nothing to prove to anyone and don't require a team to back me up. I'm also not in the business of making enemies. If someone wants to feel the way they feel about something, all the power to them, so long as it doesn't get in my way or cause harm.
I visited the website on your image and I can sense the humor. I get the joke. I also see the potential to make money. Only $16 dollars for that flag. Strikingly similar to the business model I'd prefer to use. I also see disclaimers and legalese. I do not allow forms of media to pull the wool over my eyes. I do not allow forms of governance and political parties to influence my beliefs. That is what I see there. I choose to walk alone and don't usually see the need to explain myself. I've made an exception today.
You have my respect and I wish you all the best today.
Most of what you've said here has absolutely nothing to do with intellectual property, or the discussion of a stateless world versus the current system.
There is no question of satisfaction or lack of here, the state is violence, and violence is immoral. Period. It's that simple.
If we're talking about the current world, not a hypothetical, then you have no private property, as anything you would consider such can be taken away from you at any time if you violate the "rules" of the state. At best, you are allowed to use these things as long as you're a good slave.
What were you just saying about logical fallacies? First, if you took a second to read/listen to ANYTHING on my blog, you would know that I love every human equally, and my goal is to remind as many as possible of the power that they have, which is stolen from them by states/corporations (distinction without a difference). The problem we are dealing with is one of systems/institutions and cultural programming. I would guess that less than .01% of people who work for governments have every made a conscious decision to receive their income from theft & violence, as they have been conditioned to see the state as a "good" thing... An illusion that takes 12+ years of indoctrination camps, mass media, and psychotropic drugs to maintain.
Humans require to survive:
Humans can't eat or drink money, they can't shelter themselves from a storm with money, they certainly can't get a hug from money. Money is only needed if one is incapable of being self-sufficient. Food comes from seeds, soil, sunlight, and water. Water comes from the sky and the ground. Shelter comes from a natural resource + your time & energy. The only reason people think these things depend on money is... you guessed it, that same cultural programming designed to keep them dependent on a class of middle-men, who profit off of their energy.
Throughout this, you have confused intellectual property for physical property. If you paint a portrait, and I come take it from you, I have clearly removed something from your possession. If, however, you post pictures of that portrait online, thousands of people all copying that image has in no way effected lessened what you have.
A few points.
Have a good day.
This is an oxy-moron. A sovereign is "supreme, ruler, master", one who owns themself. A citizen is a subject, a slave, a lesser class.
Again, none of these things come from money, money cannot create these things, money can only be used to get them from someone else if you are unable/unwilling to do so yourself.
Nope. Someone is, however, a slave if they don't own their own body (all citizens of nation-states)
Nobody said you should be, simply that they exist PURELY on the foundation of having a monopoly on violence.
One last thing. When you said:
This was your response to me asking how you'd feel if I took your efforts and presented them as my own. What if I do not support your values and only stole your work because I see it makes money? If I was just using you as a vessel to fatten my bank account, would that sit well with you?
Like it or not, the common person is allowed to use their government granted rights in their favor, to protect their work from abusive actions. Yes, it seems greedy when a record label making millions of dollars per year enforces their rights. I've made nearly $300. I don't feel greedy when I say my work is my work and my efforts exist in physical form. Producing and processing an image is a labor of love and takes a lot of time. I don't even ask for money here, it just comes with the territory. An independent artist on Steemit actually has a fighting chance to be able to make money. This place removes the greedy corporation and the stigma attached to owning the final product. An artist isn't out to harm people or be violent, yet many people are out to take advantage of us. I don't feel that is fair.
Just like I said in the response you quoted right above this: "You can in no way injure me by copying the work I did"
Also, this piece right here is the programming that I mentioned many times above:
Government does not and cannot grant rights. It can only infringe on them.
Just some FYI.