I'm a R&D guy. Hardcore, to the bone, third generation Inventor, with a capital I. I put food on the table for myself and others (and their children) by using the alchemy of the applied sciences. I have two US patents. (#9051539B & 9051539B2), and the pricetag was over $60k. I have patents for a reason. I am only one man. I am able to ideate (my basic job function for years), mechanical, electromechanical, pneumatic and hydraulic solutions for frequently complex problems and technical requirements with caveats imposed on my thinking by the client. Yes, ideas and "information" are my stock and trade.
Being just one man, I can visualize the most simple and elegant physical dynamics and enclose them within a machine. But, a machine, especially a one-off prototype can take months to make with 100 people working on the different processes and aspects necessary to make the machine. For one man to perform all of the same functions in sequential order means that delivery date could be many years away depending on the complexity of what is being made....from scratch. Pushing the technological envelope is not like pushing a shopping cart. Many people do R&D, few do it well, even fewer are exceptional. Which group do I fit in? You tell me. Go look up my patents. There was 6 years of work in the basic design before we filled out the patent application. That work has a monetary value invested in it. Hence, the "information" that communicates the idea also has a monetary value regardless if it is the form of 1's and 0's, blueprints or text written by quill and ink. That value belongs to me. I've earned it through the time spent in school, honing the skills necessary to design and then, go make the machine all by myself, without the other 99 people mentioned above. The catch is time. One man can only do so much in a day. A patent keeps others with greater resources from seeing what I have done, and cloning it, (in effect stealing my investment) and getting to market before I can due to lack of resources.
All it takes is money.
In your posting you demonstrate that you are both unhappy with the unethical ways that large corporations have gamed the patent system, and that you are in need of greater understanding of the differences between patents (machines & devices), copyrights (music, books and media) and trademarks (logos, artwork etc.) as your arguments mix up the contexts for each causing comparisons between apples & oranges. That said, I DO get it.
Please, before you make me list the logical issues with your arguments, do look up my patents. The actual title is ridiculously long. What it covers in essentially the first economically viable, scalable "biomass engine". Solving the algae-for-fuels problem in 2008, and willfully ignored by the federal government ever since. But, that's a rant!for when I'm not so tired.
Ask yourself how motivated to make such investments in bettering technology would you be if anybody who decided for themselves that ere was no law against it, so they cloned your work without permission (or even notification) the algae cultivation system you spent every dime you had and over 10 years (now) moving forward to market with? I assume not very. Making things is hard. Making things that are true innovations is almost impossible, and I've been lucky enough to create three.
Did you have to make your car?