(2002-03-07) c

Lucas Gonze argues against Intellectual Property because The government creates intellectual property. The proceeds are used to influence the government to create more. (in other words, trademarks generate wealth for companies who lobby congressmen to extend their trademarks to make them even more wealth). I guess this is a Slippery Slope argument that since there's no hard logic around the design of Intellectual Property protection (since it's an artificial "property"), this cycle is almost inevitable.

Jon Udell points out that we still need some way of rewarding creators of ideas, and points to Creative Commons as an attempt to solve that problem.