If i create a product like Adobe and say you can use it but my license states that if you use this product you agree to give 100$ every month forever and your data. You use it and refuse to uphold it and then i say BUT YOU AGREED. Thoughts? this isnt just a hypothetical. A couple corporations have put ridiculous clauses (like owning all future Intellectual property created on their platform) and say the same argument, BUT YOU AGREED TO. YOU SIGNED. Furthermore using violence to protect ''IP'' monopolies: A. Dont work B. Is inmoral and are not anarchist. Its authoritarian. Once you share and idea from your mind into the world you cant monopolize it by using violence (laws and police). There are other non violent alternatives to IP laws and sometimes piracy is simply impossible to prevent.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yes. I had a buddy point this out to me as well! It's somewhat akin to a woman saying she will marry a man, getting cold feet, and then the man saying "But you promised! Now I can force you to marry me!"
:) My friend referred to these types of things as "coercive contracts." It all depends on what type of legal system would be in place. I daresay most libertarians would not sign this contract. I cannot see a libertarian society favoring these types of contracts, either, though technically, in there Adobe example, if it is consensual, it can be viewed as legitimate.
I for one would not live in an area where the private property owners enforced such contracts, which forbid the user from defaulting without some extreme (in relation to the value of the service or product rendered) consequence.
Why should others have jurisdicion over a place. Individuals can make individual chioces about their lives, nor others. So my point is that an area where there are private property owners who enforce those contracts its just mafioso like. Not anarchistic at all. Which may be the case be those people cant use the label anarchy.
Who are "others"? you just said that
This means that can own their own houses and land, right?
And then, according to Anarcho-Capitalist principle, they cannot dictate what anyone does outside of that.
You need to read more.