Kekayaan intelektual: Perbedaan antara revisi

[[Libertarian]] memiliki pandangan berbeda.{{Citation needed|date=August 2018}} [[Stephan Kinsella]], ansosok [[anarcho-capitalist]]anarkokapitalis onlibertarianisme thesayap [[Right-libertarian|right-wing of libertarianism]]kanan,<ref>Stephan Kinsella, [https://web.archive.org/web/20180415041048/https://www.lewrockwell.com/2004/01/stephan-kinsella/what-it-means-to-be-an-anarcho-capitalist/ "What It Means To Be an Anarcho-Capitalist"], "LewRockwell.com", published 2004-01-20, archived 15 April 2018. Retrieved 4 August 2018</ref> arguesmenentang againstkekayaan intellectualintelektual propertykarena becausemenetapkan allowinghak propertymilik rightsdalam ingagasan ideasdan andinformasi informationmenciptakan createskelangkaan [[artificialbuatan scarcity]]dan andmelanggar infringeshak onuntuk thememiliki rightkekayaan to own tangible propertyberwujud. Kinsella usesmenggunakan theskenario followingberikut scenario tountuk arguememperdebatkan thishal pointini:<blockquote>[I]magine theBayangkan timesaat whenketika menmanusia livedhidup indi cavesgua. OneSeorang brightpria guy&#x2014;let'scerdas—sebutlah call himia Galt-Magnon&#x2014;decidesMagnon—memutuskan tountuk buildmembangun agubuk logkayu cabindi onlapangan an open fieldterbuka, neardekat his cropsladangnya. To be sure, this isPastiya aini goodgagasan ideabagus, anddan othersorang noticelain itmenyadarinya. TheyMereka secara naturallyalami imitatemeniru Galt-Magnon, anddan theymereka startmulai buildingmembangun theirgubuk ownmereka cabinssendiri. ButKalau themenurut firstpendukung man to invent a houseHaKI, accordingmanusia topertama IPyang advocates,membuat wouldrumah have a right toberhak preventuntuk othersmencegah fromorang buildinglain housesmembangun onrumah theirdi owntanahnya landsendiri, withdengan theirkayu owngelondongannya logssendiri, oratau to charge themmembebankan abiaya feekepada ifmereka theyjika domereka buildmembangun housesrumah. ItJelas isbahwa plaininovator thatdalam thecontoh-contoh innovatorini inmenjadi thesepemilik examplessebagian becomesdari akekayaan partial owner of the tangible propertyberwujud (e.g.misalnya, landtanah anddan logskayu) of others, duebukan notkarena topendudukan firstpertama occupationdan andpenggunaan useproperti of that propertyitu (forkarena itsudah is already owneddimiliki), butmelainkan duekarena to his coming up with anadanya ideaide. ClearlyJelas, thisaturan ruleini fliesbertentangan indengan theaturan facerumah oftangga thepengguna first-user homesteading rulepertama, arbitrarilysecara andsewenang-wenang groundlesslydan overridingtanpa thedasar verymengesampingkan homesteadingaturan rulerumah thattangga isyang atmerupakan thedasar foundationdari ofsemua all propertyhak rightsmilik.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080730030236/https://mises.org/books/against.pdf N. Stephan Kinsella, ''Against Intellectual property''] (2008), p. 44.</ref></blockquote>[[Thomas Jefferson]] oncejuga said in a letter tomenyurati Isaac McPherson onpada 13 AugustAgustus 1813:<blockquote>IfBila naturealam hastelah mademenciptakan anysuatu onehal thingyang lesstidak susceptiblebegitu thanrawan alldaripada otherssemua ofyang exclusivelain property,daripada itkepemilikan iseksklusif, theitulah actiondaya ofpikir theyang thinkingdisebut powergagasan called(akal an ideapikir), whichyang ansecara individualeksklusif maydapat exclusivelydimiliki possessseseorang asselama longdia asmenyimpannya heuntuk keepsdirinya it to himselfsendiri; buttetapi thebegitu moment it is divulgeddiungkapkan, ititu forcesmemaksa itselfdirinya intomenjadi themilik possessionsetiap of every oneorang, anddan thepenerima receivertidak cannotdapat dispossessmelepaskan himselfdirinya of itdarinya. ItsCiri peculiarkhasnya character,juga too,adalah isbahwa thattidak noada oneyang possessesmemiliki the lesssedikit, becausekarena everysetiap otherorang possessesmemiliki the whole of itkeseluruhan. HeDialah whoyang receivesmenerima angagasan ideaitu fromdari mesaya, receivesmenerima instructionpetunjuknya himselfsendiri withouttanpa lesseningmengurangi minesaya; asibarat heia whomenancapkan lightspelita hisdi [[Candle|taper]]tambang, atlalu mine,ia receivesmenerima lightcahayanya withouttanpa darkeningmenggelapkan mesaya.<ref>[http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_8s12.html Thomas Jefferson, ''Letter to Isaac McPherson''] (August 13, 1813)</ref></blockquote>InPada 2005 the, [[Royal Society of Arts]] launched themeluncurkan [[Piagam Adelphi Charter]], aimedbertujuan atuntuk creatingmembuat ankebijakan internationalinternasional policyyang statementmemungkinkan tobagaimana framepemerintah howharus governmentsmembuat shouldUU makeHaKI balanced intellectual propertysecara lawberimbang.<ref>Boyle, James (14 October 2005). [http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/comment/story/0,,1591467,00.html Protecting the public domain]. ''The Guardian''.</ref>

AnotherAspek aspectlain ofdari currentUU U.S.HaKI IntellectualAmerika PropertySerikat legislationsaat isini itsadalah focusfokusnya onpada individualkarya andindividu jointdan worksbersama; thus,sehingga copyrightperlindungan protectionhak cancipta onlyhanya bedapat obtaineddiperoleh indalam karya 'originalorisinal' works ofdari authorshipkepengarangan. CriticsKritikus likeseperti Philip Bennet argueberpendapat thatbahwa thisini doestidak notmemberikan provideperlindungan adequateyang protectionmemadai againstterhadap [[culturalpengetahuan appropriation]]adat ofistiadat indigenousdan knowledge,ekspresi forbudaya whichtradisional, ayang [[Indigenousmembutuhkan intellectual property|collectiverezim IP regime]] is neededkolektif.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Bennet|first=Philip|year=2009|title=Native Americans and Intellectual Property: the Necessity of Implementing Collective Ideals into Current United States Intellectual Property Laws|ssrn=1498783}}</ref>

IntellectualHukum propertyHaKI lawtelah hasdikritik beenkarena criticizedtidak asmengakui notbentuk recognizingseni newbaru forms of art such as theseperti [[budaya remix culture]], whoseyang participantsmasyarakatnya oftensering commitmelakukan whatapa technicallyyang constitutessecara violationsteknis ofmerupakan suchpelanggaran lawsUU tersebut, creationmenciptakan worksvideo suchmusik as [[Anime music video|anime music videos]] anddan otherssejenisnya, oratau aretunduk otherwisepada subjectbeban todan unnecessarybatasan burdensyang andtidak limitationspenting. whichsehingga preventmenghambat themekspresi frommereka fullysepenuhnya. expressing themselves.<ref name="JemielniakPrzegalinska20202">{{cite book|author1=Dariusz Jemielniak|author2=Aleksandra Przegalinska|date=18 February 2020|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yLDMDwAAQBAJ|title=Collaborative Society|publisher=MIT Press|isbn=978-0-262-35645-9}}</ref>{{Rp|70}}<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Fiesler|first1=Casey|last2=Feuston|first2=Jessica L.|last3=Bruckman|first3=Amy S.|date=28 February 2015|title=Understanding Copyright Law in Online Creative Communities|url=https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675234|journal=Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing|series=CSCW '15|location=Vancouver, BC, Canada|publisher=Association for Computing Machinery|pages=116–129|doi=10.1145/2675133.2675234|isbn=978-1-4503-2922-4|s2cid=28669082}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Freund|first=Katharina|date=1 August 2016|title="Fair use is legal use": Copyright negotiations and strategies in the fan-vidding community|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814555952|journal=New Media & Society|language=en|volume=18|issue=7|pages=1347–1363|doi=10.1177/1461444814555952|issn=1461-4448|s2cid=11258627}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Allen|first=Peter James|date=24 August 2008|title=Rip, mix, burn … sue … ad infinitum: The effects of deterrence vs voluntary cooperation on non-commercial online copyright infringing behaviour|url=https://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2073|journal=First Monday|language=en|doi=10.5210/fm.v13i9.2073|issn=1396-0466}}</ref>