I was suggesting a "general approach", rather than a specific solution. Rather than focusing on the "stealing" part, create wider use and acceptance for "IP use" practices. Biggest problem now is that the system is broken. "IP use" involves costly and cumbersome legal processes.
Everybody accepts that you can't walk into a store and walk way with things from there. Create conditions that will create similar expecations so that IP is seen in a same manner.
@Net_chief - not sure I fully understand your comment. Are you saying that if the IP were cheap enough then less people would steal it and so it would not be worth the legal protection that is done today? The developer of the IP has to get paid sufficiently for the work they have put into its creation and its maintenance. Otherwise they will dissapear and the nmaintenance will be gone. The buyer of the IP is then left holding the bag on something that they have to reverse engineer.
re: "The problem of IP theft will be always an issue because there are companies who don't care about it."
Cumbersome legal processes make monetizing IP complex, reducing incentives for small companies to manage IP effectively. Creating easily accessible markets for IP can help drastically reduce problems with IP.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.