Part of the problem is that we think that the protection of IP is a given. If we look at the origins of copyright and patent, though, that “given” ought to be seriously examined.
Copyright originally had nothing to do with protecting the income of authors. When printing presses were first becoming popular, the Crown would grant individuals the “copyright” to publish approved books. Thus, it was originally a tool of censorship.
Similarly, patents weren’t a way to protect those who developed novel devices, but to attract artisans to work in a given province, who were good at what they did, even if they didn’t originate those techniques–they were monopoly grants through and through.
Over time, the justification for these things have morphed into “we need to protect the innovators”–and it’s debatable that patents and copyrights do even that–but it should come as no surprise that big companies and governments can so easily use these tools to secure monopolies and to censor us.
