I find the discussions interesting because for all the protestations about IP nobody posts specific court decisions.
Lets take the AR15. Armalite designs it, Colt owns it, and they sold the Government the OP for the TDP on the M4. Yet the market is filled with AR15's of every description, price, and caliber. I have every certainty that Colt paid for and owns the "idea" of the AR15. Yet how is it that they aren't suing left and right to protect it?
We ARE talking guns that literally will exchange parts - and for that, an entire industry in selling parts and kits exists which assembled will produce a functional firearm. I've built two. I am completely unaware of any fees or licensing paid to Colt for their "intellectual property" use. And for that matter, I am also aware that some of the parts offered for sale are not Made in the USA, either. Same as a growing handful of 1911's, too.
Rather than protest IP exists, explain how it doesn't in the face of those two firearms. When the subject comes up vis a vis government contract with Colt, Remington, and FN, it seems to be a lot of publicity but little done.
And that brings us to Bushmaster, the first to offer an AR15 clone. If Colt owned the IP lock stock and barrel, they would have never gotten to first base. In fact, because of the numerous and crowded field of examples where IP is deliberately and specifically copied for others use and resale, I believe that there are two different concepts involved which are legally separated.
What are they?
Nope, the LCP isn't pirating theft of design from Keltec. However, for the point of the discussion, lets go for a gun that specifically does - and the industry even brags about how their parts are mechanically and functionally interchangeable without alteration or further fitting whatsoever. Drop in replacements.
IP theft or what?
I will say it again, without copyrights or patents, IP doesn't exist. If you can't enforce it in the courts then you are open prey to the competition.