Why we should hail China's spending spree

[Vulcanl]

JP,

"...You're talking about the process of creating and marketing intellectual property..."

No, I'm not.  I am talking about a physical good (the book/other media).  IP is not a real good.

"...I think So What nailed it - you want your own IP protected, but you're OK with stealing it from others..."

I don't agree at all.  So What is attempting to put words in my mouth.  Please read the post directly preceding this one

[jalanperak]

JP,

"...You're talking about the process of creating and marketing intellectual property..."

No, I'm not.  I am talking about a physical good (the book/other media).  IP is not a real good.

Sure it is. You don't buy a book for the paper and binding. You buy it for the value of the words.

Your link (which reminds me of a typical birfer site) attempts to show that all IP has essentially zero value, hence the argument that stealing it is a victimless crime. This is BS. Using it's silly sandwich argument, this would imply that the value of a recipe is zero. If that's the case, why are so many kept secret?

"...I think So What nailed it - you want your own IP protected, but you're OK with stealing it from others..."

I don't agree at all.  So What is attempting to put words in my mouth.  Please read the post directly preceding this one

Of course you don't, but you're still wrong. You're attempting to take your disdain for large corporations (latent issues here?) and morph that into a rationalization for stealing intellectual property from them. Sorry, but your own words show that you do understand that IP has value, but see no problem with stealing it from others. 

[Vulcanl]

JP,

"...Sure it is. You don't buy a book for the paper and binding. You buy it for the value of the words..."

Up until the mid-1990s or so there was no distinction between the two.  Corporations have  been scrambling ever since to ensure that their interests are protected.  They have done so by introducing the ridiculous concept of IP

"...Your link (which reminds me of a typical birfer site)..."

Odd...there is nothing in that link about Obama or where he was born.  The Austrian school of economics is a legitimate one, and indeed in my opinion these guys do the best job in explaining human behavior in an economic context

"...attempts to show that all IP has essentially zero value, hence the argument that stealing it is a victimless crime. This is BS. Using it's silly sandwich argument, this would imply that the value of a recipe is zero. If that's the case, why are so many kept secret?..."

I disagree.  The logic is actually very sound, based on supply and demand concepts:  If a good is NOT scarce it should not be worth very much.  Another way one can look at what Corporations are doing is that they are attempting to 'create' scarcity by having Governments write laws that help them. 

"....Of course you don't, but you're still wrong. You're attempting to take your disdain for large corporations (latent issues here?) and morph that into a rationalization for stealing intellectual property from them. Sorry, but your own words show that you do understand that IP has value, but see no problem with stealing it from others..."

Again, I disagree (this is OK).  At least you have considered this idea and the next time it is proposed (by someone other than me) you may come around to seeing its virtues

[Kubes.SG]

V, we know you work in a bank, or at least used to work for a bank.  Presumable the bank has a way of assessing your performance and through that deciding salary increases, promotions and who gets fired.

Without knowing what you do, lets say you have to solve complex work-process problems as your key contribution to the Bank's bottom line.  Some of the toughest problems when solved could save millions and make you a hero.  Other do this type of work too.  At lunch one day with a bunch of the dudes including Mr Teoh from 19F, you are shooting the breeze about your latest great insight and idea to solve a MAJOR corporate challenge.  Mr Teoh is a typical SG born and bred but entirely conniving.  Two weeks later you discover he has taken your unique insight and masterful idea,  written it up as a proposal for the local leadership team, gained kudos and recognition, secured funding, and got promoted to boot.

Meanwhile two months later, you are fired as you under-perform and are unable to solve problems in your area of responsibility.  

Is this is right and fair?

[$Pripps]

It depends on the type of "espionage" they're engaging in. In a previous company I used to reverse engineer our competitors integrated circuits. This form of "espionage" is perfectly legal and ethical. We were baselining our competitors' design philosophies and comparing them with our own. All designs are compromises, and knowing what your competitor deemed more important helps you market your own product more effectively (i.e., if they traded off ESD robustness to get a smaller I/O cell size, we could point that out to a customer). We also could tell what their manufacturing costs were, so we had a good idea of what their minimum selling price could be. Finally, we looked for evidence of infringement. All of this is above board and perfectly acceptable.

The other kind of espionage isn't legal or ethical. If, for example, a company pays informants to disclose marketing or non-public financial information, that company has broken US Law (at least, and likely laws in many other countries) and can be held accountable. Sadly, there are companies like this out there, and part of protecting your intellectual property includes taking steps to prevent such leaks from happening or from fatally damaging your business.

I don't agree, reverse engineering is not at all as harmless as you try to make it, most
companies I have worked for regard reverse engineering as stealing and often have
an explicit paragraph in their license agreement stating it is illegal to do. They also - AFAIK
did not reverse engineer other companies products (but maybe mainly because of the NIH attitude). Personally I find the practice of reverse engineering other products shady at the very least.

Pipps, you might know what you're talking about in the software world, but you're quite wrong about the semiconductor world.

There are (usually) no license agreements when you buy a microchip, and certainly no enforceable agreements when you buy a handphone or other bit of consumer electronics.

Intel, Samsung, Toshiba, Renesas, Texas Instruments, Hynix, STMicroelectronics, Micron, Qualcomm, Elpida, Broadcom, AMD, IBM, Infineon, Sony, etc., all have departments that reverse engineer their competitor's chips (my previous employer is in this list). There are at least four companies around the world that specialize in semiconductor reverse engineering (Chipworks, Semiconductor Insights, TAEUS, Sanguine - now a part of SI, Analytical Solutions), as well as others who make it a large part of their business. TAEUS also reverse engineers larger electronic systems. Portelligent is a company that specializes in handphone and consumer electronics "teardowns" (they're OK at systems, but they suck at the chips themselves), and EVERY handphone manufacturer subscribes to their reports.

Reverse engineering is not stealing. If you have a good idea and you want to incorporate it into your product, you patent the idea. If I reverse engineer your product and I discover your clever, patented idea, all that happens is that I confirm how clever you are. If I incorporate your idea into my product without licensing your patent, that's stealing (and if you're a company like Intel or TI, I guarantee you that I will be sued for that infringement), but there's nothing wrong with knowing about the idea in the first place.

Just because it is general practice in your industry doesn't necessarily mean its right but OK I see your point.

[Agent99]

JP,

"...Sure it is. You don't buy a book for the paper and binding. You buy it for the value of the words..."

Up until the mid-1990s or so there was no distinction between the two.

 So in the mid 1990's there was no distinction between what? Paper and binding? Or did people buy books and didn't care what was written in them?

[Vulcanl]

Agent99,

Pre-mid 1990s it was virtually impossible to separate the content from the medium, and therefore possible for Corporations to 'create' scarcity

[jalanperak]

Agent99,

Pre-mid 1990s it was virtually impossible to separate the content from the medium, and therefore possible for Corporations to 'create' scarcity

Not really. Broadcast television and radio have been around much, much longer than that. There is no "scarcity" of programs because the medium and the message are separate entities. Me watching channel 5 doesn't deprive anyone else of watching this channel, yet I perceive value from watching this (well, maybe channel 5 is a bad example of value. But still....).

The only thing that technology has changed is the mechanism by which IP is distributed. Back in the day, the owner of IP "controlled" the distribution of most IP by controlling the medium. That paradigm no longer works, but that doesn't change the value of the IP. The fact that it can be distributed for little or no cost means that the IP can be distributed to a much wider audience at potentially a much lower "per unit" cost, but that doesn't mean the cost goes to zero.

[Vulcanl]

JP,

I agree with almost all that you have posted above.

[Vulcanl]

Kubes,

"...V, we know you work in a bank, or at least used to work for a bank.  Presumable the bank has a way of assessing your performance and through that deciding salary increases, promotions and who gets fired..."

Yes

"...Without knowing what you do, lets say you have to solve complex work-process problems as your key contribution to the Bank's bottom line.  Some of the toughest problems when solved could save millions and make you a hero.  Other do this type of work too.  At lunch one day with a bunch of the dudes including Mr Teoh from 19F, you are shooting the breeze about your latest great insight and idea to solve a MAJOR corporate challenge..."

OK

"...Mr Teoh is a typical SG born and bred but entirely conniving.  Two weeks later you discover he has taken your unique insight and masterful idea,  written it up as a proposal for the local leadership team, gained kudos and recognition, secured funding, and got promoted to boot..."

OK

"....Meanwhile two months later, you are fired as you under-perform and are unable to solve problems in your area of responsibility...Is this is right and fair?.."

No, it is not right and fair.  Assuming that I no longer work for a bank or other large MNC, this scenario would be one of the reasons for that.  Teambuilding/teamwork are nothing more than buzzwords that in my experience most often than not are not executed well.  All it takes is one bad apple to tear down a good manager's hard work in this regard.

Moving on from the morally wrong act that was performed against me, I should not have told anyone about my idea as its mere mention to someone else devalued it by my reducing its scarcity.

I have now answered your question.  Will you now please extend me the courtesy of a reach-around and answer mine?

[Agent99]

Agent99,

Pre-mid 1990s it was virtually impossible to separate the content from the medium, and therefore possible for Corporations to 'create' scarcity

I see, but times have changed! There was no YouTube or iTunes then.