The flaw in this concept is the free-rider problem:
1. Not all new IP can be created as a side project without funding.
Suppose that I have to come up with an investment of $X million to pay for the goods and services needed to develop something.
(Even assigning existing employees to do the work is an investment, because the money used to pay them presumably could be used for something else — i.e., investing in the new thing represents opportunity cost.)
Suppose also that the resulting IP is easily copied once the new product or service is out in the open.
Without some kind of legal monopoly under IP law, copiers — who aren't burdened by my development costs — can quickly run the market price down to marginal cost.
2. A marginal-cost market price means that I can't charge enough to be able to recoup my investment while still staying competitive.
That, in turn, means that I'm unlikely to be willing (or even able) to fund the investment needed to develop the IP.
3. That's why the U.S. Constitution, article I, section 8, clause 8, allows Congress to create IP rights for limited times.