Raw LLM Responses

@rjvtechnologies No one said perpetual compensation, there are laws that allow you alone to profit from that hypothetical enhanced chair for a certain amount of time or competitors have to pay you in order to license your design. If there was not, your competitors would have an advantage over you. For every chair based on your model they sell, they would turn a profit. But for every chair you sell you wouldn't. Because you had to pay for the costs to develop that enhanced chair. So any revenue you make is going to those sunk costs before you start seeing a profit. So a company can make improvements to your design after that set number of years has passed. Otherwise if they were able to make improvements to your design from the start, it would stifle innovation. Why would you waste money on RND if your competitors can reap the benefits of that immediately for free? And why would a competitor waste money on RND to improve your model if you can immediately use their enhanced version of your chair? And so on.... Better to stick with the current design on the market, as it won't cost you or your competitor anything. And consumers lose because there would be no improvements on chair designs in this scenario. Copyright law is interesting, sometimes it's misused, like Disney holding up the entire public domain by lobbying Congress to keep rewriting and extending copyright law because they don't want their early works, many of them based around public domain stories themselves, to fall into the public domain. But the point is copyright law in its ideal is designed to protect the artists, author, inventor, etc. and to benefit society. Which is why it's so troubling that AI companies are trying to avoid this and engage in theft.