Let's time warp back a bit.  The Founders of the New Republic of Venice are considering whether or not to put Patent and Copyright Laws into the Constitution.  On the one hand, the Founders wish to encourage progress in technology and the arts.  On the other hand, the Founders understand that they would be allowing the government to grant monopoly power (even though it is temporary) to private entities, and they wish to avoid the corruption that flows from special interests lobbying the government to gain these monopoly rights.  The also philosophically oppose copyright infringement laws that effectively grant one person control of another's property

 

What arguments for and against these laws can be submitted?

 

If no such laws are written in, would that mean that no useful innovations will occur in New Venice?

 

If such laws are written in, is that not a violation of the "anti-monopoly" stance of the Founders?