Share:

Ending Intellectual Property

Time is a new time by the time it exists, and because neither your nor the brain are abstracted from time, both you and it are new ones by the time that they exist. Who then is there to either have or to not have thoughts, to produce or to not produce concepts? Why then does intellectual property law exist? It doesn't even make sense in its own ballpark, because by trying to take credit for a thought, one only ever conjures a concept of that thought but does not repeat the initial thought itself. Intellectual property law confuses the thought of a thought for the initial thought itself and thus negates its own argument by claiming that the former isn't actually movement of its own. If that's to be the nature of a thought and, therefore, of all thought, the original idea referenced then must also not have been movement of its own. As such, what is there to take credit for? (And, no, a concept of a concept of a thought can't be equated to the concept of a thought either.) Even if this were to be denied, intellectual property law still doesn't make sense. If one has a thought as something other than themselves, then the thought isn't within them, that which has it. Therefore, the thought isn't inherently theirs, they can't claim it as their own, simply because of their experience of it. Please support this petition to end intellectual property and to restore a world that moves genuinely. Thank you.
(c) Petition2Congress, all rights reserved. For web site support: email info@rallycongress.com or call (202) 600-8357