[WAR] ... and AP - now IP

juan juan.g71 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 2 13:03:36 PDT 2016


On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 07:16:19 +0000 (UTC)
jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> wrote:



> This doesn't mean
> that I object to the current patent system. 

	For the record, the current patent system has nothing to do
	with libertarian philosophy. The patent system is a system of
	state-granted privileges that are not compatible with private
	property rights. And it comes from the middle ages and the
	monarchies of that time. 

	Not surprisingly it was adopted by the american slave state
	that was 'founded' in 1776 or thereabouts...


> In her book
> Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand came out on the side of private intellectual
> property, 


	It's funny that all 'her' ideas about political philosophy were
	'stolen' from libertarians. Why should rand get to write novels
	using ideas she stole from other pople? Did she pay royalties
	to the libertarian thinkers she plagiarized?

	(as a side note : not only she stole 'her' political ideas from
	libertarians - she never really understood libertarianism...)

	She also stole all the rest of 'her' ideas from rationalists,
	individualists, atheists, and the like. 


> objecting to the theft by government of metal-maker Henry
> Reardon's special metal alloy, 
> "Reardon metal", by means of
> blackmail. Of course, I understand that by citing Ayn Rand's
> reasoning (and I am by no meansa Randian, having learned I was a
> libertarian years before knowing about Ayn Randand her books) it may
> seem I am committing the rhetorical sin of 'appealing toauthority'.

	It's OK to appeal to technical authority. Doesn't mean the
	particular appeals are valid though =P 

	And in the case of rand she was pretty mediocre from a
	technical point of view anyway. 


> And, I realize that there is something of a conundrum about
> advocating a 'free market' and yet implicitly supporting the one
> remaining control, that ofa patent system somewhat akin to what the
> world uses today. 

	Yes. The patent system is an anti-competitive contraption that
	goes against the competitive nature of the free market.


> (Who enforces sucha patent system, except a
> government?) Let me propose an outline of a solution which could
> square the circle:  At some early point, say age 18, each person
> would be asked whether he wishes to livehis life WITH Intellectual
> Property rules, or not.

	There are so many...statist...assumptions and implications in
	that. So, no, that is not workable in a libertarian framework.


> He can choose either way, butif he refuses,
> manufacturers can band together to agree to sell only to people who
> agree to those rules.  Correspondingly, those who sign the
> pro-IntellectualProperty agreement agree thereby to bar themselves
> from buying products fromnon-intellectual-property agree-er
> manufacturers.  Violations could be policed byan AP-type system.


	You mean murdering people who copy 'patented' ideas  - ideas the
	patent holders most likely stole from other people anyway?

	

>  This wouldn't have to be a permanent decision, for any person. 

	That's OK, because the kind of 'contract' needed to get the
	system you want to work is not a valid contract. So in practice
	it is not 'enforceable'


> Other
> manufacturers may make products that are made for sale to
> non-Intellectual Property agree-ers, but they will be shut out from
> dealing with what I expect will be the majority, let's call them
> "Pro-Intellectual Property"people and manufacturers.


	Let's call them anti-competitive corporatists.


> I am fairly
> confident that the advantages of dealing withwhat I believe will be
> the majority, those that comply with Intellectual Property rules,will
> be sufficient to keep all but a small minority of the public willing
> to livevoluntarily with such rules.  Put simply, I suggest that there
> are some rather powerfuladvantages to having a system which rewards
> inventors. 

	Inventors do get the rewards they deserve when there's no
	patent system. Of course the rewards they deserve are a lot
	smaller than the 'rewards' they can get from monopolistic,
	state-granted privileges. 



Jim Bell 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>    



More information about the cypherpunks mailing list