> One of the most tragic ideas to evolve in this century is the idea of "intellectual property"--that you can own an idea for years, sometimes tens or hundreds of years.
(1) Intellectual property protections didn't originate in the twentieth century. In the U.S., they exist in the original text of the Constitution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause), and they existed in other countries well before then.
Of course, the duration of copyright protection has gotten completely out of control. But I think that should be attributed to the ability of copyright lobbyists to influence lawmakers, rather than to the idea of intellectual property itself.
...rather than to the idea of intellectual property itself.
Whereas ISTM the current regime is inevitable, given the existence of "IP" and the legislative means to modify it. It is a money-printing machine for lawyers and executives. If we can be certain of anything, it is that future generations will be plagued by yet more oppressive incarnations of this folly.
EDIT: If "A -> B" and "B is Bad", then "A is Bad".
(1) Intellectual property protections didn't originate in the twentieth century. In the U.S., they exist in the original text of the Constitution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause), and they existed in other countries well before then.
(2) Copyright doesn't protect ideas (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea%E2%80%93expression_divide). The ideas underlying copyrighted works can be freely copied.
Of course, the duration of copyright protection has gotten completely out of control. But I think that should be attributed to the ability of copyright lobbyists to influence lawmakers, rather than to the idea of intellectual property itself.