[Upd-discuss] 3 minutes documentary on Public Domain

[sandor]

Richard M. Stallman wrote:

>It's an extreme generalization to say that "IP" is harmful
>
    I want to question this.

    The logic for all IP being harmful is clear and obvious.
    This discussion is pertaining to, and in favor of,  the public domain.
    IP, by it's definition - reduces the public domain.
    IP is immediately harmful to the public domain.

    I believe your response is that the application of conceptualizing 
thoughts as being able to be owned and /or limited by something external 
to one's self - can produce a future benefit to the public domain that 
outweighs the immediate cost?

    Is this proven?

    I believe I understand the concepts of incentive and the need for 
artificial-scarcity so that a thing may enter capitalism - but I have 
not been presented with an demonstration of how this is more efficient 
than all other methods of incentive and resource distribution. There 
seem to be many examples of people currently doing things that do not 
have direct economic incentive - things which positively benefit large 
portions of society, how are these non-relevant?
    People will consistently abandon financial considerations for 
ethical/moral ones - why do you find an economic incentive superior to a 
social one?
    If there are examples of social organization that hint to a solution 
bereft of this intrinsic negative - it seems the goal of this 
organization to seek-out and develop them?

    I will not accept an answer the rests on the structure of a society 
born to support the same system - everyone knows your fondness for 
recursive things ;)

Thanks!
-sándor

P.S.
I think trademarks are requisite in a complex capitalist system - 
however they do not need to encompass intellectual property to function 
- it could be a string of digits or bar cod that hold no additional 
meaning and are not reducing the public domain to limit use of.