Comment: I own what's in my mind, you own what's in yours.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: So in your goofy assed world (see in situ)

I own what's in my mind, you own what's in yours.

If I write a song and don't share it, then it would only exist in my own mind, and certainly I'm the owner.

But if I then play it for you (without making you sign a nondisclosure contract or something first), then you would have a copy of the song in your mind too. My copy is mine, your copy is yours. You can't tell me what to do with my copy, and I can't tell you what to do with yours.

My perspective is simply respect for the natural rights of the individual to do as he pleases with what's in his own mind. It's not socialist or collectivist at all. In fact, it's *your* position that's socialist/collectivist, because you want the government, by implicit threats of violence, to restrict my freedom to do as I please with what's in my own mind, because supposedly "society" would benefit if government grants false monopolies to the person who claims to have come up with the idea first. The socialists come out of the woodwork to support patent and copyright law, because they think that otherwise, "society" wouldn't get new art/music/inventions/pharmaceuticals as fast. (It turns out that's not true; IP laws actually stifle innovation. But the socialists don't believe that when demanding stronger IP protections.)

Have you read the short, excellent letter Thomas Jefferson wrote on the subject?