Real estate has facts and opinions: the size of the land and where it is; how much the land nearby sold for; last price paid for this land; condition of the buildings.
Copyright only has opinions and history, and for the vast majority of IP, the history is "nobody has ever paid for this".
But the real killer for this proposal is that it creates a new mechanism for rich people or corporations to take work away from others. If the market is not serving the needs of the people at large, the people at large will and should alter or abolish the market.
> the real killer for this proposal is that it creates a new mechanism for rich people or corporations to take work away from others.
There's two ways you could mean this:
1. A rich guy really likes your IP, for personal reasons; he's willing to pay a bunch of money for the rights to it.
2. A rich guy making business decisions thinks he can profit at someone's expense from owning large swathes of IP; he swoops in and buys it all up, to the detriment of the public.
Case #1 could absolutely happen under the harberger IP scheme. If Elon Musk decides he likes your cartoon, he can buy it at your declared price, and say it's his, and everyone will say "yes, Elon, that is yours."
But Elon Musk already does that every day; he's constantly cropping the watermark off some cartoon or other and posting it on X, and everyone says "yes, Elon, that is yours." The only difference under the harberger IP scheme is that the artist actually gets his declared value for the cartoon from Elon.
Case #2 is what the harberger IP scheme is designed to facilitate, but it's not taking work away from others--it's buying the products that others have created, at the price at which the owner is willing to sell. This is what professional artists want. There's nothing here that would allow rich people or corporations to profit in some way that normal people cannot.
Copyright only has opinions and history, and for the vast majority of IP, the history is "nobody has ever paid for this".
But the real killer for this proposal is that it creates a new mechanism for rich people or corporations to take work away from others. If the market is not serving the needs of the people at large, the people at large will and should alter or abolish the market.