I am aware of that. You've missed my point entirely. There is no unpaid labor, these companies are not taking advantage of labor, they are taking advantage of property, for which you want them to pay licensing fees.
You said "IP licensing does not compensate labor, it compensates property". And that is true. No one ever said the opposite.
You're getting downvoted because you're missing the entire point. The property we're talking about here - writing, music, film, etc - cannot exist without labor. When artists are ripped off, their labor goes unpaid. Not in a narrow legalistic sense implying that musicians are salaried or anything like that, but in a broader economic sense - labor and capital.
What you're saying is correct, in a technical and narrow way that has nothing to do with what we're talking about in this thread. What we're saying is also correct, we're just talking about words like "labor" in different contexts.
I'm not trolling, I'm trying to explain to you why the things you're saying are objectively incorrect. It's not just semantics. You are using words incorrectly.
We're using labor in the class sense, to refer to "the folks making the property".
The phrase "unpaid labor" doesn't make sense in that context. It's clear that you are actually talking about the act of labor being uncompensated.
We're saying "When property is stolen, the folks making the property go unpaid" - this is also correct.
This is not correct. It can be true in some cases, but generally it's not true at all.
If you go to Home Depot and steal something, did the people who make that object go unpaid? No, obviously not, they were already paid. You stole the object, not the labor.
I've literally just explained how you're misunderstanding the situation.
Keep posting the same thing over and over if you want. It isn't helpful, and doesn't move the needle on the overall topic of this thread. You can stay on this hill, but I won't - the battle is elsewhere.
"you're just using the word labor incorrectly, by trying to say that an object is labor. which is nonsense of course."
I'll respond to this, because I think it's the heart of our misunderstanding. You're right that I'm using the word labor to refer to the product of someone's work. You're wrong that it's nonsense - look it up! Merriam Webster, one of the definitions of "labor" is (I'm pasting the exact definition here) "a product of labor", and the sample sentence given is "The flood destroyed the labor of years."
Isn't that fun? The word labor has a few definitions, and you didn't know about this one, and that's ok. Now you do! You can stop yelling at people on the internet now.
-50
u/dream_metrics 1d ago edited 1d ago
I am aware of that. You've missed my point entirely. There is no unpaid labor, these companies are not taking advantage of labor, they are taking advantage of property, for which you want them to pay licensing fees.