No, because you did not use any of their intellectual property in doing so.
You are conveniently ignoring the fact that A is taking something for which B did actual work.
No, because you did not use any of their intellectual property in doing so.
You are conveniently ignoring the fact that A is taking something for which B did actual work.
A song is IP. A car is not technically IP but merchandise is involved so I’d say that counts. A movie is IP. A game is most certainly IP.
By your opinion, observing that game before making my own “infringes” their IP. And same for the song. And by that test, watching a movie at a friend’s is piracy, and borrowing a friends car is robbing the car manufacturer of profits.
It really seems to fall apart if you simply place a black box over the “who” of creating something completely different, seemingly based solely on our biological memory not being digital.
It is, actually, more of a problem than theft of physical items. The latter you can just buy again while the former robs you of intangible values that among other things may grant you the ability to just buy physical property. The latter doesn’t scale and is generally more difficult because it’s more visible, while the former can be (and is being, in fact) done at population scale without people realizing it until it’s too late. Also, expectation of ownership claim is a meta level of why people want to make more original things, including new and cool physical items.