Abolishing intellectual property law would mean the end of the statutory rights that protect patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets. The immediate result would be economic chaos. If there are no patent rights it is difficult to rationalize the $50 million investment to develop a new pharmaceutical or the $10 million investment to bring a new software program to market. The licensing business model falls apart. Every ideological open-source extremist would rejoice until their first competitor reverse engineers their entire product in six hours, turns it into a commodity and undercuts them by $1 on every unit sold. Enforcement would move from the courtroom to the contract and the code. Expect massive private ordering through embedded encryption, watermarking, access gating and so on. You would quickly create a market for digital arms race in which scale trumps all else. Small businesses would be overwhelmed. Artists would have their work replicated in volume with no attribution or recognition. Open innovation is a fine concept but in the absence of some form of legal fence cutting and theft become indistinguishable. Some people suggest that abolishing IP would increase competition. This is a shortsighted view. In the short-term it might have this effect but ultimately all you have done is moved the costs of protection from a public good to private, less transparent and less accountable mechanisms. Abolishing IP does not give you more freedom, it just means fewer rules and more abuse.
Removal of IP laws might encourage innovation by allowing anyone to build upon existing ideas without the fear of legal repercussions. This openness could lead to rapid advancements and new creations-- I can see an immediate spike in many new knockoff products openly selling on third-party commerce platforms. But with so many huge corporations (think Apple, Disney, or Microsoft) acquiring and investing so much in exclusive IP libraries, it's unlikely that the US will enact any changes to IP law. Both individuals and corporations rely on IP law to sustain revenue. Patents are what sustain the pharmaceutical and IT industries-- so overall, I think deleting all IP law would result in an immediate loss of consumer trust, jobs, and potentially catastrophic economic destabilization.
If we scrapped all IP law, businesses like mine in real estate would lose the ability to protect our unique branding, systems, and marketing materials, making it much easier for competitors to copy our hard-earned work overnight. It might seem open and collaborative on the surface, but in the day-to-day, it would probably mean fewer people pour themselves into building something original--since anyone else could just take it and run. Ultimately, I believe that would dampen motivation to improve neighborhoods or offer creative solutions, which is what really makes communities thrive.
There are definitely some ways in which IP law is holding society back. Large media companies holding copyrights and trademarks for decades on end, frivolous lawsuits by patent trolls, and high prices for life-saving medications are just a few side effects of our current approach to intellectual property. That being said, "deleting" all these laws would create a chaotic free-for-all that would create more problems than it solves.
This would disincentivize people from investing in non-physical capital and stall progress. In order to promote innovation, we need to protect avenues for patent and trademark enforcement.