Intellectual property
From Free Talk Live
Intellectual property is a term used to encompass patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets. Libertarian perspectives on intellectual property differ. Some libertarians, such as Ian and Stephan Kinsella believe intellectually property is illegitimate, while others, such as Ayn Rand and Lysander Spooner, were in favor of it. Murray Rothbard favored copyrights, which he viewed as enforcable, valid, voluntary contracts, but was against patents, a government monopoly. However, his argument is commonly used by anti-IP advocates attempting to convince pro-IP individuals. Rothbard's argument is no more than a logical extention of contract arguments.
Contents |
Arguments against Intellectual Property
- As government monopolies, Intellectual Property disrupts the workings of the market.
- Intellectual Property infringes upon tangible property rights. A patent holder or copyright owner can tell owners what they are allowed to produce with their property. As an example, the holder of a patent on a mousetrap can force others to not make copies of that mousetrap, even from their own metal and wood.
- The free rider argument is invalid. A company cannot know what products to rip off unless those products first earn their innovators a profit, in which case the ripping off would be too late. Further, this is an example of competition. Even if it did happen, it would not be a problem. The innovator would have to keep up with his competitors and improve his product, benefiting the consumers and everyone else.
- Trademark law is flawed. If Burger King sells me what they say is a Big Mac, but it is a Whopper, I'm the one whose rights have been violated. I thought I was getting a Big Mac, but got a Whopper. Clearly, this is fraud. I should be able to sue Burger King and they should have to refund me. However, under trademark law, McDonald's can sue, I can't.
- Patents hinder progress. The owner of a patent is more likely to not make copies of his product, and "earn" money by suing other companies.
- Property exists only because some goods are scarce, and as a result some method of regulating the use of these scarce goods is needed. If a good is not scarce, anyone can use it without depriving others of their use of the same good, hence it cannot be property. An idea clearly cannot be scarce, since an unlimited number of persons can use the same idea, without depriving the person who originally came up with it of its use. Therefore ideas cannot be property. Intellectual property is simply a government-granted monopoly.
Arguments for Intellectual Property
- "Patents and copyrights are the legal implementation of the base of all property rights: a man’s right to the product of his mind." -- Ayn Rand, in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.
- Without patents, no one would want to invest money in new projects, as any product would be ripped off by other companies, which, without R&D development costs would out-compete the innovator.
Pro-IP ideas about Restructuring IP law
If IP law disappeared suddenly and companies never compensated, it would be worthless for individuals and companies to invest time and money into researching new products. Thus many individuals assume some IP law would exist in a libertarian society, some of which might be the following:
- Only products can be patented, not ideas. In order to obtain a patent you must have and be able to demonstrate prior art. This would eliminate situations such as RIM vs NTP.
- All patents are limited to a 5 year lifespan at which point they enter the public domain.
- An improvement to an existing product can be patented by someone else.
- Works of art are only under copyright so long as the original artist(s) live. Upon the artists' death the work enters the public domain.
- Individuals shall retain all rights to copy and reproduce any materials which they have legallypurchased but they may not resell such copies for personal gain without the expressed written consent of the original copyright holder.
Protecting Ideas Without Force
- Protection agencies could charge publishing companies for copy restriction clauses to be in their protection contracts, which a customer would voluntarily enter into.
- Secrecy.
Resources
N. Stephan Kinsella, Against Intellectual Property. Journal of Libertarian Studies, vol 15, no. 2.
