I disagree. Mission creep is a well-known, not lawyer-related phenomenon. When US politicians felt that IP should be part of the trade order, they cast aside all “trade-related” language and considerations of WIPO and went for it. (Short thread)
The problem really is that when you feel you need to resolve a problem you look for a solution and you use the tools you have - even if they are not fit for purpose. You need to turn a screw but only have a knife? Well, you go for it /2
So how do we tackle it? The problem is the conflict between “I have a problem to solve, here‘s my toolbox” (expansive thinking) and ”you are going too far, that’s not what I wanted”. /3
Given the way humans function I feel we’ll end up in a bit of a sinus-curve: continued expansion (Oh look - here’s a tool that resolves many problems) will give way to exaggerated destruction (that goes so far, limiting it will not work - let’s get rid of it all). /4
