Part of the problem with debating the question is that we have all lived our lives in the age of patents. Therefore, hard to even imagine the world otherwise. Whereas people suggest no one would have the desire to invent things, we actually do have the wheel, the lever, writing, movable type, and control of fire, to name some obvious inventions that occurred without patent law.
My argument is complicated further that we are not just born in the patent era, but we are also born in the era when the "object of humanity" has been distorted into being economic entities. As such, it comes natural to assume that the foundation of life is economic.
There of course was a decent argument for patents and copyright. But, like all economic laws, it is quickly perverted, distorted and used as a lever for the purpose of moving capital upwards into vast piles that can't be accessed by humanity as a whole. Warner Brothers owns the copyright to "Happy Birthday" and charges rather large fees for it's commercial use. The copyright was extended to 95 years.
IP laws (copyright and patents) now control the simple human endeavor of "entertainment." I find that to be so ridiculous as to not need much explanation. But, in case it does, as every human interest and endeavor enters into economic contracts, freedom of expression dies a little bit. Until we have this atomized population sitting in front of screens watching an illusory image and entertainment world for which they MUST WORK MANY HOURS to pay for.
Currently, patents are being used in medicine to bankrupt the population. A rather clear abuse of the intent. The entire IP system is clogging courts, costing humanity valuable equity in the world they inhabit, and creating ever more hording of capital.
It's pretty hard to argue that the song "Happy Birthday" is more important to humanity that the "wheel".
