Unless every invention is gonna be AI generated (which is kind of a scary situation), intellectual property still needs to be a thing (otherwise people won't have incentive to invent, it'll just be stolen from them).
People have an innate desire to invent and create. This is why so many people do it for zero extrinsic reward. Hell, this is the case for almost every musician. They are fed a pittance in streaming, only a bit more than most OSS developers get.
This intrinsic motivation is more normally "farmed" by investors who capitalize and capture the IP value for themselves. This actually has a detrimental effect on innovation.
Doing away with or watering down intellectual property protections will just take big meaty chunks out of the stock market and partly equalize wealth distribution.
It'll probably spur innovation too - historically it usually has, but preserving the existing social order takes precedence over that which is why a lot is invested in persisting the myth that it aids rather than hinders innovation.
> otherwise people won't have incentive to invent, it'll just be stolen from them
Citation needed. Speaking personally, I spend most of my creative energy on a project which is open source and permissively licensed to the point where I’m fine with anyone stealing it. I expect to earn negative money from it at the limit.
Why do I do it? I dunno it’s fun. Can’t that be enough?
This intrinsic motivation is more normally "farmed" by investors who capitalize and capture the IP value for themselves. This actually has a detrimental effect on innovation.
Doing away with or watering down intellectual property protections will just take big meaty chunks out of the stock market and partly equalize wealth distribution.
It'll probably spur innovation too - historically it usually has, but preserving the existing social order takes precedence over that which is why a lot is invested in persisting the myth that it aids rather than hinders innovation.