Replies to post #6244 on The Free Zone Board

[RoguePlanet]

Remember, the sole justification for intellectual property rights is a cost-benefit analysis of pragmatism -- Spall
___

I disagree. There's a moral justification as well. -- Rogue

Really? Then is it morally wrong for pharmaceutical companies to make an generic copy of a drug after the government-granted monopoly has expired? Spall
___

No. And I didn't say that it was. Please note that I have not argued for any extension of copyrights or government-granted patents. -- Rogue
___

I might have added your response was a classic example of a "straw man" argument, Spall. Why didn't you just ask me, "Well, what IS the moral justification?"

[Spallenzani]

No. And I didn't say that it was. Please note that I have not argued for any extension of copyrights or government-granted patents.

But you said that there is a moral justification for intellectual property rights. If there is one, this moral obligation would exist regardless of government. So what does this moral justification for intellectual property rights consist of? Does it last for 5 years? 10 years? 100 years? Forever? Whatever the government determines?