From: Hal Finney (hal@finney.org)
Date: Mon Jun 10 2002 - 00:58:20 MDT
Dan asks, regarding intellectual property:
> What do you think the Extropian position should be? Should there be
> one? How would one go about measuring extropy in this context?
I think the Extropian Principles do give some guidance on this problem.
> Open Society --
> Supporting social orders that foster freedom of speech, freedom of
> action, and experimentation Opposing authoritarian social control
> and favoring the rule of law and decentralization of power. Preferring
> bargaining over battling, and exchange over compulsion Openness to
> improvement rather than a static utopia.
This suggests that we would favor a diversity of approaches to the
problem. The ideal situation would be to have some groups which respect
IP and others which do not. However that would not work very well if
there were good communications between the groups, which we would also
desire. The problem is that the non IP region is a threat to the IP
region, as we see today with countries which don't respect copyrights.
If data produced in the IP region is then freely shared in the non IP
region, and that free data leaks back into the IP region, then IP rights
have been defeated.
What this means is that in practice we need to have a generally uniform
approach to IP among all groups which are in close communication.
> Self-Transformation --
> Affirming continual moral, intellectual, and physical self-improvement,
> through critical and creative thinking, personal responsibility, and
> experimentation. Seeking biological and neurological augmentation
> along with emotional and psychological refinement.
As we move forward we need to think of our minds as being information
processes. Whether we become uploads or augmented biological systems,
we will have many new abilities to control and manipulate information.
This seems likely to conflict with IP rights. For example, upon
experiencing a concert or movie, it will be possible to re-experience
it with perfect fidelity as many times as desired. People may also
be able to share sensory experiences among themselves, allowing IP to
leak between people. There may even be group minds with loosely defined
memberships which come and go. Tracking the movement of IP among such
structures would be difficult and invasive. Cryptography will likely give
us completely opaque communication channels that can connect physically
separated parts of a mind, or separate people, allowing IP to be shared
undetectably. People will be able to construct new software programs
and even new physical enhancements to their minds just by thinking,
providing new ways to infringe on IP.
Given such self transformations, the only way to control IP will be to
have an incredibly invasive infrastructure, literally a monitor built
into everyone's mind in order to see that they pay the proper royalties
when they think certain thoughts. I think virtually all Extropians would
agree that this is unacceptable, yet it seems that there will be no way
to enforce IP in practice without such surveillance.
> Perpetual Progress --
>
> Seeking more intelligence, wisdom, and effectiveness, an indefinite
> lifespan, and the removal of political, cultural, biological, and
> psychological limits to self-actualization and self-realization.
> Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and possibilities.
> Expanding into the universe and advancing without end.
As we expand into the universe, retaining IP controls will become
increasingly expensive, especially if speed of light limitations remain.
Relativity theory even implies that it may be theoretically impossible
to decide who was the first discoverer of some particular piece of IP.
Attempting to keep track of IP and control rights to it on a galactic
scale and beyond seems completely impractical.
I think you can also go back to the Open Society principle and argue
that IP requires a greater degree of centralized control and a more
complicated set of laws and rules governing communication. A non IP
regime is inherently simpler and more flexible.
Of course, balanced against all of these is the argument that IP
encourages innovation, which will promote Extropian principles of
Perpetual Progress, Self Transformation, Intelligent Technology,
and so on. I think this is a reasonable point given the immature
state of technology today. But based on the arguments above, in the
long run enforcing IP is inherently inconsistent with Extropian values.
The technological possibilities which we will have available to us cannot
coexist with the kinds of monitoring and control which will be necessary
to enforce IP rights.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:42 MST