| > Asking one of these companies to reveal the algorithms they’re using is tantamount to theft. Intellectual property is a legislative creature. There was never a "natural law" conception of it and it largely didn't evolve in caselaw either. That said, Australia has a constitutional guarantee against compulsory acquisition without payment on "just terms"[0] and which is not for a purpose supported by another Parliamentary power. Such a case might not succeed (a case by tobacco companies against plain packaging was not successful in arguing that it represented an acquisition of their brands and trademarks[1]), but it would almost certainly reach the High Court. If their Honours ruled that an algorithm or trained model was property within the meaning of the Constitution, it's likely that compulsory acquisition would require payment of billions, perhaps tens of billions, of dollars. At that point it would be easier to regulate it, which would be unlikely to trigger the guarantee. I am, of course, not a lawyer. But Constitutional law was one of my favourite subjects before dropping out of law school. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_51(xxxi)_of_the_Consti... [1] http://eresources.hcourt.gov.au/showCase/2012/HCA/43 |
IMO the issue isn't with IP but trade secrets which have a long and well established history within human endeavours. In fact, they are the basis of the patent system which intended to get them "freed" from companies so others could expand on their work.