[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Of course there's a difference. If I share intellectual "property" with you, I still have the IP, and you have the IP.

If I give you an apple, I no longer have the apple.

If you don't think that's a difference, there's not much that can be done to help you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course there's a difference... It's the difference between public and private goods. You're trying to tell me about the difference between a tomato and an apple while I am aware that one is a fruit and the other a vegetable.

The question that obviously needs to be answered is whether intangible intellectual goods are always public goods.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, now there IS a difference? Which is it?

Perhaps you should define what you mean by "public goods"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

As most people who argue against the AC position, you are completely oblivious to the fact that under a system of voluntary agreements, copyright protections ARE possible, without a coercive government.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never even mentioned the government here, lol. Paranoia ftw as you'd put it.
Trust me I am aware of the conditions under which the market mechanism can provide public goods and they are fairly restrictive and even then in most likely lead to "inefficient" results.

Anyways, do you realize what transaction costs do to your little AC-world, do you? Ronald Coase certainly did.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Government cannot eliminate or reduce transaction costs. It simply shifts them, transfers them, and masks them.

As for Coase, he himself explicitly recognized and pointed out cases of private production of so-called "public" goods.