Intellectual property

Intellectual property is property in ideas or patterns. Intellectual property laws are a grant of a monopoly to originators of ideas, giving them a legal right to initiate force (through the state) against anyone making use of the idea without the permission of the originator of that idea.

Modern libertarians, such as Stephan Kinsella and Jeffrey Tucker, consider the term to be self-contradictory, because ideas and patterns are not scarce or rivalrous, so logically cannot be owned.

Types of Intellectual Property

Intellectual property usually refers to patents, copyrights and trademarks. It can also include trade secrets, libel^{[dubious – property discuss]} and slander^{[dubious – property discuss]}.

History of Intellectual Property

Patents emerged as a form of protection for mercantiles. Copyrights are rooted in control and censorship of ideas.

Views on Intellectual Property

Intellectual property is a regularly debated subject among libertarians.

• Stephan Kinsella and Jeffrey Tucker are two of the most prominent strong opposers of all forms of intellectual property.
• Murray Rothbard was opposed to patents, but he believed that a weak form of copyrights could be enforced through contracts.
• Ludwig von Mises and F. A. Hayek were largely opposed to intellectual property.
• Ayn Rand was an enthusiastic supporter of intellectual property.

Arguments against Intellectual Property

Ethical

Stephan Kinsella's seminal article, Against Intellectual Property outlines the modern libertarian case against all forms of intellectual property. Kinsella's paper focuses on the unethical nature of intellectual property rights. They are always in opposition to real material property rights. They are a straightforward government grant of monopoly to a favored producer.

Utilitarian

Since advocates of intellectual property generally appeal to utilitarianism (that 'nothing will be created' if creators are not granted a monopoly over their creation), Michele Boldrin and David Levine have examined, in their book Against Intellectual Monopoly, the empirical evidence for this claim. They find that, rather than stimulating creativity and innovation, intellectual property laws - especially patent laws - usually inhibit creativity and innovation.