| ▲ | renewiltord 2 days ago |
| In fact, we need to provide more intellectual property rights for people over their names. Famous people's names should be blocked off in perpetuity for their families only, though resale may be permitted. It is time we formalized this universally held social behaviour. |
|
| ▲ | TheCoelacanth 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Perpetuity is insane. You shouldn't be able to name something "Ramses" without permission even though he's been dead for over 3000 years? I could see maybe 20 years after death being reasonable. |
| |
| ▲ | embedding-shape 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > I could see maybe 20 years after death being reasonable. And another person sees 10 years as reasonable, another as 30 years. Ultimately, our life-spans also change, so what works out today, might not work out in 30 years. What about after the last direct decedent is no longer alive? Grand-children might not care that much, but it's unlikely your children wouldn't care about how others use a name associated with you and indirectly them. | |
| ▲ | renewiltord 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's just so icky trying to use the name Ramses. How about Sheepses instead? If you must insist on the gender, perhaps menses? We can all agree that 100 years is perhaps sufficient, though if someone makes the case that it should be a 1000 years I wouldn't disagree. At 5000 I think it's probably still fine, but even today the descendants of Grug have not received a dime despite the fact that he invented the wheel, so perhaps we need to go back longer. |
|
|
| ▲ | tliltocatl 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > more intellectual property rights is the last thing we need. Granted, picking a famous name you don't have any association with is an a-hole move. Not all a-hole moves should be illegal. |
