Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 4970844" data-attributes="member: 19675">That was a discussion of the origins of why profit is viewed as a remedy even when someone wouldn't have bought the product stolen.The caselaw is before us in the form of IP law, which adopted the some of the same remedies.It is.<Edit>If it helps, think of it as analogous to a type of theft that just happens to have a longer statute of limitation and slightly different remedies.  A long time ago, states decided that it was best for society as a whole to have a concept of abandonment of property.  That way, the use of property will tend towards actual use, not laying fallow.  In the eyes of the state, its better to have someone take the property and use it productively in some way than to have it lie unused- the fact of disuse and non-enforcement of property rights is seen as evidence of abandonment, transforming the theft into a transfer of property rights. If you steal a car and get away with it for 20 years, the law will not and cannot prosecute you for that theft.If you adversely possess property for your location's statutorily set period- typically 10-15 years- that property is yours.  If you're sued before that period runs- and remember, there are things that extend the beginning of that time period- then you're subject to forcible eviction, fines and even penalties (which vary from state to state).</blockquote>