Eminent Domain used against firearm patents?
Eminent Domain has traditionally been applied towards property in the form of land and dwellings. Is it not possible and logical that eminent domain can apply to other forms of property? Is not intellectual property just as tangible as any other form of property?
Could one reason that a government could make a case that it would make good economic and societal sense if a piece of intellectual property say a patent or a copyright owned by one would be better owned by another or by the State itself? Of course there would have to be “fair-market” compensation for the intellectual property.
Let us say that the State determines that the patents for various types of firearm mechanisms are found to be economically costly to the State because these firearm mechanisms are used to cause injury and thus medical costs. Could the State use eminent domain in the name of economics to acquire firearm patents? Could the State acquire copyrighted material that the State finds economically destructive?
Could not a large company approach the State to use eminent domain to acquire patents from a smaller company or individual with the argument that the larger company can get much greater economic use and create more jobs and tax revenue from the patents than the smaller company can?
Property is property. Is it not?
Eminent Domain has traditionally been applied towards property in the form of land and dwellings. Is it not possible and logical that eminent domain can apply to other forms of property? Is not intellectual property just as tangible as any other form of property?
Could one reason that a government could make a case that it would make good economic and societal sense if a piece of intellectual property say a patent or a copyright owned by one would be better owned by another or by the State itself? Of course there would have to be “fair-market” compensation for the intellectual property.
Let us say that the State determines that the patents for various types of firearm mechanisms are found to be economically costly to the State because these firearm mechanisms are used to cause injury and thus medical costs. Could the State use eminent domain in the name of economics to acquire firearm patents? Could the State acquire copyrighted material that the State finds economically destructive?
Could not a large company approach the State to use eminent domain to acquire patents from a smaller company or individual with the argument that the larger company can get much greater economic use and create more jobs and tax revenue from the patents than the smaller company can?
Property is property. Is it not?