Discussion Is it morally and ethically okey to "steal" some else inventions in another universe?

The moral lessons we learn from stories and the ethics that we live our lives by make sure that society functions. There are lots of people going all different kinds of ways, doing all kinds of different things, and if we didn’t have rules we agreed to live by, it would be chaos, anarchy, and we’d kill ourselves off.

In a situation where someone is plopped into a different universe there are a few things they should be aware of. What are the local morals and ethics that they should be aware of? The morals and ethics of their past life might get them into trouble, so it’s best to conform to the local standards.

Next are the practicalities. What situation is the person in? Is their clan on the brink of being wiped out? Are they about to be abandoned into the street as a useless person to be forced to eek out a living as a dog? These are usually the settings someone discovers themselves in when they transmigrate.

The inventor of something is in another universe and likely long dead. And like was mentioned, it’s a different universe. Someone else might invent it tomorrow, or it might never get invented. So if it pricks their conscious too much, they can always name the device after the original inventor.

But is that kind of moral qualm going to stop them from taking advantage of knowledge that could keep their whole family from being killed or sold as slaves? When faced with that kind of dilemma, the pragmatic thing to do is to make use of everything they can to keep them and their family alive.

In the face of survival, patent laws of a different universe are nothing more than a fart in the wind.

[Dictionary definitions that I didn't put at the beginning so people don't have to read them to get to my argument.]

Morals: 1) A lesson, especially one concerning what is right or prudent, that can be derived from a story, a piece of information, or an experience. 2) a person’s standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do.

Ethics: 1) Moral principles that govern a person’s behavior or the conducting of an activity. 2) the branch of knowledge that deals with moral principles.

Practical: 1) of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas. 2) (of an idea, plan, or method) likely to succeed or be effective in real circumstances; feasible.

Pragmatic: dealing with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations.

 

Here's the thing, you're suddenly transmigrated into another world. You're barely making ends meet because the skills you've spent your entire life learning is useless in this world. Now, if you had the chance to make use of someone else's invention to improve your life, would you care about ethics or morals at this point?

 

Sure why not. No one care if its really your idea or not. Who's gonna call you out? The inventions are making life better for everyone, plus its gonna kick start technology revolution faster.
I don't see whats wrong with it. Are we gonna wait for a guy who's gonna invent it be born a decade later?

 

If you time travel to the past it may not be morally good to 'invent' something someone else would later, but legally it is perfectly fine.
If you go to another universe, depending on how much it has in common with our own, it may even be morally good to do so as inventions are generally supposed to further civilization.

 

Tbh no.
I won't really give a damn about others(Original inventors) if I reincarnated or transmigrated to another world.
Would their invenstions in the modern world help me in another world? Yes. It could get me rich ( depends )
Would anyone give a damn about it? I doubt it.
I won't even need to say I thought about it. As there may not even be a law against plagiarism in the freaking other world.
Also
As long as you're not caught, it's fine.

 

It's a form of welfare for anyone from our world ending up in another one: borrow technological and cultural content to save your skin!

As for time traveling, I think many researchers, inventors, and cultural figures would be excited for the concept they created/discovered to have a chance to influence the world earlier.

 

I think it doesn't matter if you're actually getting transported to another world. But it's another problem if you're just got send to the past.

 

I'd say it is not wrong unless the inventor has possibility of incurring a loss of some type. If anything, it might even be morally right to do so.

Why not wrong:
Inventor most likely will never ever be able to reach said universe so they lose no profit. Products from said universe can't flow back to Earth, so again no loss.

Why right:
The "invention" might be a much needed one over there. Example, a water pump at a place with no water readily available.

Edit: after all is it morally right to leave someone to die, when you know that by "stealing an idea" you can save lives?

 

I don't think patents are really relevant here. The question is if it's wrong not if it's legal. If you're over there pretending that you wrote Hotel California then it's wrong because you're a liar. It's like The Wandering Inn. Erin doesn't really claim that she's inventing cake or burgers. She claims that they're from her homeland. That's what a decent person would do if possible. However, if you're reincarnated and everyone knows your history then that might not be impossible and I could excuse it.

 

This has so many meanings...

 

Taking ideas and implementing them in new world? No brainier, yes. Those ideas help society after all. Not to mention most things you implement will be things which patents have long expired and is public domain anyways. If anything, it would be immoral NOT to share modern knowledge with the world. A lot of people think patents were created to protect IP, but that is a myth. It is the OPPOSITE. Patents were created so that IP is shared with society. It just gives the creators a certain protection to capitalize on their investment for a set period. It is lawyers who immorally come up with loopholes to extend the IP longer than it should be.

As for sticking your name on it? That is up to you really. There is nothing morally wrong with it really. I mean think about it, what is an idea? That something came to your head and you implemented said idea before others. If you have knowledge of another world, then how is that any different than you coming up with said idea? Then there is the question of where you draw the line. If someone comes up with the idea of a teleportation that they wrote in a book. Then someone actually builds a teleportation device. Whose idea was it? What if someone gave you a hint without knowing it? There are too many blurry lines.

So end of the day, the idea belongs to whoever comes up with something and actually builds it. Since you are the first person in the world who built the idea, you are more than allowed to claim credit for it.

I mean look, can you REALLY give credit to the original maker of the idea? More then likely you can't anyways. Because more than likely you wouldn't know who they are. Only what the fabricated history tells you. For example, if you made a lightbulb, who will you give credit to? Edison? He didn't. Edison copied the idea from some british guy (forgot their name). He did improve upon it though, but he didn't invent it. Then who knows if some alien race made a lightbulb before any of them somewhere in the universe.

So keep it simple, you built it first? It's yours. You can claim credit yourself, or give credit to whoever (like your cat, which isn't uncommon, cats are known for many science discoveries)

 

Since most advancements in fixing and learning how the human body works were made by people who just liked to torture people and treat them as test subjects it would be completely unethical to not take credit in an alternate reality lest the atrocities of the past repeat themselves.

 

If they directly followed the directions in the book and created the teleportation device then the author. If the book just made them want to create a teleportation device and they figured out how themselves then the guy who made it.

 

I have mixed feelings about it. It feels wrong to me no matter what, but it feels less wrong to say, “invent” the pen or other quality of life enhancing products. It feels more wrong to me to say, “invent” a song, poem, or other creative work, as that isn’t a quality of life product, but something someone put their soul into that you’re stealing.

 

Okay, the book says breaking down a person into molecules then using quantum entanglement and re-assemble the molecules. But try actually doing that! It's like its easy to explain how a fusion reactor works, but building one is infinite times more complicated.

It's like one of the new trend in patents these days is patenting concepts that they don't have the ability to achieve but feel it'll be possible in the near future. And these things make me face-palm because that is nothing more than abuse.

 

Honestly, it's
1. ethically wrong
2. realistically improbable
Something simple enough for a common person to make by themselves isn't a very impressive invention. A product impressive enough to be an invention, however, is complicated and generally made of many pieces of technology. Even someone who specializes in a certain piece of machinery would likely need lots of trial and error if told to produce it from scratch.

Anyways, academia is harsh against plagiarism because their research is their career. Stealing the credit for a researcher's work is like replacing your colleagues' name on all their projects. You're ruining their resume and making them seem useless.

In fact, wheels are patented. But we don't pay for the patents. Patents are designed to expire. That way, inventors and researchers are paid for their work but costs do not become unreasonably high. If there were no patents, there would be no incentive to research. The exception is pharmaceuticals, because most companies will do a minor modification to extend their drugs' patents.

 

Well edison did it to tesla in the same universe and he got away with it. So a definite yes.

 

The problem is that they are claiming to have invented something that they only know because someone else invented it, it's lying about your own intelligence. So it is kinda wrong to claim to have invented something you didnt. But in the end the crime is merely in terms of stealing credit and maybe claiming to be more intelligent than you are, so it isnt a big problem (the inventions themselves might cause all sorts of problems tho)

 

If you invent something on your own here in our real world.. and then find out that someone else invented the "same" thing before... does this realization change the fact that you invented it ?

 

If it wasn’t already invented in that world then you’re fine. You’re introducing a new technology and deserve credit.