That is not accurate. Many laws -- those we probably most respect -- are grounded on actual basic factual effects. They have a justification prior to conventional or legal constructs.
For example, if you take a material object from me, you deprive me -- directly and physically. That is the core justification of normal property, and there is no such justification for IP.
"For example, if you take a material object from me, you deprive me -- directly and physically. That is the core justification of normal property, and there is no such justification for IP."
What about identity theft? You aren't actually "stealing" anything. The original identity is still there.
Counterfeiting (currency and things like ipods) is another example. It's illegal and you aren't actually depriving anybody of anything.
"Identity theft" per se is rarely the problem, it's the credit card (and other) frauds committed using the 'stolen' identity that cause issues. And obviously those frauds deprive both the actually-defrauded party and rightful 'owner' of the identity of the opportunity cost of sorting it all out.
That is not accurate. Many laws -- those we probably most respect -- are grounded on actual basic factual effects. They have a justification prior to conventional or legal constructs.
For example, if you take a material object from me, you deprive me -- directly and physically. That is the core justification of normal property, and there is no such justification for IP.