Against Intellectual Property - part 1/12

Against Intellectual Property

Narrated by Jock Coats (http://jockcoats.me)

This monograph is justifiably considered a modern classic. It is by Stephan Kinsella who caused a worldwide rethinking among libertarians of the very basis of intellectual property. Mises had warned against patents, and Rothbard did too. But Kinsella goes much further to argue that the very existence of patents are contrary to a free market, and adds in here copyrights and trademarks too. They all use the state to create artificial scarcities of non-scarce goods and employ coercion in a way that is contrary to property rights and the freedom of contract.
Many people who read this essay for the first time were unprepared for the rigor of his argument, which takes time to settle in simply because it seems so shocking at first. But Kinsella makes his case with powerful logic and examples that are overwhelming in their persuasive power.
The relevance in a digital age can't be overstated. The state works with monopolistic private producers to inhibit innovation and stop the progress of technology, while using coercion against possible competitors and against consumers. Even U.S. foreign policy is profoundly affected by widespread confusions over what is legitimate and merely asserted as property. What Kinsella is calling for instead of this cartelizing system is nothing more or less than a pure free market, which he argues would not generate anything resembling what we call intellectual property today. IP, he argues, is really a state-enforced legal convention, not an extension of real ownership.
Few essays written in the last decades have caused so much fundamental rethinking. It is essential that libertarians get this issue right, and understand the arguments on all sides. Kinsella's piece here is masterful in making a case against IP that turns out to be more rigorous and thorough than any written on the left, right, or anything in between.

Paperback available at:
http://www.mises.org/store/Against-Intellectual-Property-P523.aspx

Pdf version:
http://mises.org/books/against.pdf

Audio book:
http://www.stephankinsella.com/wp-content/uploads/media/AgainstIntellectualPr...

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• against
• intellectual
• property
• cut1

[johngeetar]

"Against Intellectual Property by Stephan Kinsella. Copyright 2008 Ludwig Von Mesis Institute..." Was I the only one who found this amusing?

[janc71]

@meberic Well, apparently you simply have a copyright by law, once you publish a book. It's simply exists, whether you like it or not. But you can download the book for free from the mises' and author's website.

[meberic]

Copyright 2008 Ludwig Von Mesis Institute??? WTF??

[meberic]

@bmac6446 That's what Pepsi and Burger King thought... There´s and advantage of being the first and having the advantage of the information. And you can protect your "secrets" without the use of force.

[bmac6446]

Personally, I wouldn't waste my capital on R&D without some type of patent protection. I would wait for some other sucker to waste capital on it then copy his gizmo or widget. He suffers the loss and I reap a profit off of his capital. It wouldn't take a modern electronics manufacturer very long at all to copy another's products.

[bmac6446]

@edgarloike I understand the copyright end of the argument. But, what about the massive amount of capital that is spent on Research and Development of new products. Why bother wasting capital in developing a new product when someone else would just copy your product and sell it cheaper than you could because they don't have to recoup cost from R&D. I'm speaking primarily about patents. The removal of patent protections would also remove the profit incentive to develop new products.

[4lifejackhammer]

@bmac6446 It takes a long time to truly rip off a product. A new drug may have ingredients posted, but that doesn't tell you the quantity of each. Reverse engineering is a difficult process, which means a new drug receives plenty of time to make up the loss. Additionally, because one company came out with it first, it remains the "trusted" supplier of the drug, which is a difficult barrier to overcome.

[edgarloike]

@bmac6446 Youtube is a prime example. For every good original video, there is 100 re upoloads or copycats.

[bmac6446]

As a follow up, where would innovation come from if their wasn't a profit motive for innovating? The USSR and East Germany stayed in a perpetual 1950's state due to a lack of innovation incentive.

[bmac6446]

Even as an Austrian myself I find it hard to wrap my mind around this idea. Where would the incentive come from for Research and Development if whenever your new product came out someone else is waiting by to copy it and sell it cheaper because they didn't waste their capital on Research and Development. I'm not being a smart_ss I just have serious questions about the IP issue.

[Illyrien]

@gavinjengel

We should introduce such a society and find out :) I seriously doubt patents would exist. Perhaps there is some room for copyright, but most of all I do expect trademarks would exists.