Issue Subscription Is $25

s Whole Number 168 “If one takes care of the means, the end will take care of itself” 1st Quarter 2016 On the Ownership of Ideas inventors, and their heirs would always be limited by By Carl Watner competition from independent innovators (and their In my article (THE VOLUNTARYIST, Whole heirs), from producers of different, but parallel, No. 166) on the historical development of copyright, I products or services, and from competition for the explored whether or not copyright protection of an users’ dollars. Competition would work in author’s output was the result of the natural evolution establishing the price of ideas, just as it does in the of the common law. I concluded that copyright was pricing of tangibles and land. [2] not a voluntary phenomenon, but rather one brought Those on the Kinsella side of the fence argue that about in the English-speaking world by government ideas cannot and should not be owned. They claim legislation in early 18th Century England. The point of that there is no basis in libertarian homesteading my investigation was to see if there was any historical theory for protecting or recognizing IP rights because basis for claiming that intellectual property might be IP is not a scarce, tangible product, and can be used subject to ownership in a voluntaryist society. What I by many people at the same time without conflict. did find to partly buttress the case for ownership was Kinsella also objects to the fact that “a system of the fact that authors’ moral rights to their intellectual property rights in ‘ideal [i.e. intangible] objects’ property have existed since antiquity. necessarily requires violation of other individual As I wrote in the Addendum to my copyright property rights, e.g., to use one’s own tangible article, there are two opposing ‘camps’ within the property as one sees fit.” [3] libertarian movement with regard to the question of The catalyst for my original article on copyright intellectual property (IP) rights. Lysander Spooner was Tom Bell’s book, INTELLECTUAL (1808-1887) and Andrew Joseph Galambos (1924- PRIVILEGE: COYRIGHT, COMMON LAW, AND 1997) represent those who favor the recognition of THE COMMON GOOD (2014), which I received as a intellectual property rights, while Benjamin Tucker review copy in June 2014. A few months later, a (1854-1939) and Stephan Kinsella (b. 1965) represent subscriber and former Galambos student, Richard those who claim such rights would not and should not Boren and I began a long series of email exchanges on be respected. Those on the Galambos side of the fence the topic of IP. In fact, Richard prepared a lengthy advocate a common law system which would explanation of the property ideas of Andrew J. recognize and protect perpetual property rights in Galambos, titled “For Intellectual Property” which intellectual property. They reject state-sanctioned can be found at The Voluntaryist’s website copyrights and patents and would reach their goal by (www.voluntaryist.com), along with other pro-IP and voluntary means rather than by government anti-IP essays. Richard had attended a large number of legislation. Protection of intellectual property rights Galambos’ courses, including V-201, the one devoted would come “from social pressure (the community’s to IP. As a result of my correspondence with Richard, sense that ideas are property, that it is wrong to steal, I began to better understand Galambos’ point of view and that copying without permission is stealing on IP. My discussions with Richard also prompted me someone’s property) and then from the private judicial to re-read Lysander Spooner’s work, THE LAW OF system, which would be restitution-based.” INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (1855), and allowed Since Galambos believed “that there must be me to fulfill the promise I made at the conclusion of protection of intellectual property for there to be a my Addendum, namely to analyze the arguments for durable [and flourishing] voluntary society,” he and against the ownership of IP. proposed a dual program to attain full IP protection. After a great deal of thought I came to the “Innovators would disclose their innovations to a conclusion that Spooner and Galambos were correct: private registration company, and the innovations people in a truly voluntaryist society would would then be made available for use … first by a eventually come to recognize property in ideas. How process of negotiated terms and payment amounts, would this come about in the absence of the nation- and later by releasing them to wide[r] distribution, state? This is difficult to answer since the nation-state with payments for use in amounts set by the users.” has been with us for hundreds of years, but the same insurance companies that we would expect to play a As a result, ideas would not “be locked away forever.” [1] The amounts of royalty payments to authors, (continued on page 3) water’ … by shutting off water to those who refuse to pay” their past due bills. After wracking up more than $ 6 billion in debt, the Detroit Water and Sewerage Editor: Carl Watner Department cannot borrow more money and is Webmaster: Dave Scotese threatened with bankruptcy itself. But as Detroit’s current mayor finally concluded, water is not free. Subscription Information Mayor Duggan says he doesn’t “know how to filter Published quarterly by The Voluntaryists, P.O. Box water and pipe it from the river to somebody’s house” 275, Gramling, SC 29348. A six-issue subscription is $25. For overseas postage, please add $5. Single back without incurring a great deal of expense. Someone issues are $5. Gold, silver, and bitcoin readily accepted. ultimately has to pay: either the end-user or some Please check the number on your mailing label to see “forgotten man” as William Graham Sumner called when you should renew. Carl Watner grants permission to reprint his own articles without special request. THE him. Water isn’t free and those who claim it is should VOLUNTARYIST is online at www.voluntaryist.com. pay for it themselves or find donors who will. [From THE PHILADELPHIA TRUMPET, September 2014, Potpourri from the Editor’s Desk p. 8 and an NPR news program of August 8, 2014.] No. 1 “The Lofty Standards of Liberty” I'll list some of the big ones here but this is by no No. 3 “To Voters in the U.S. Government” means a complete roster: Respect for the lives, Each voter in the United States Government votes property, choices and contracts of your fellow for the war-making power, and acts as a principal in citizens. A healthy recognition that as much as you shedding whatever blood is shed by it. Each voter is think you know, there's a world of knowledge out virtually the jailor and hangman - the war-maker and there that you don't know. Self-improvement should the commander-in-chief and whatever robbery and be a life-long commitment. If you want to reform the murder are committed by Congress and the President - world, you must reform yourself first and then be a by the army and the navy - are done by him, and he, good example that others will seek to emulate. Refrain individually, must render an account thereof to the from the initiation of force, … . Central planning final Judge. requires an arrogant, condescending, know-it-all - H. C. Wright, BALLOT BOX AND BATTLE- attitude that a person of solid character should shun. FIELD (1842), p. 1. Take responsibility for yourself and your loved ones; no one owes you a living just because you breathe. No. 4 “Madmen, Martyrs, and Malingerers” When you see someone who needs and deserves help, One can only speculate about how the private remember that the Good Samaritan wasn't good sector would deal with madmen, martyrs, and because he told the man in the gutter to call his malingerers too dangerous to release [or who have congressman; he pitched in and got the job done refused or who are unable to work off their debts]. himself at probably half the cost and twice the These individuals have violated the rights of others in effectiveness that any politician could. Don't assume society, so they would have a legal obligation to pay that liberty is automatic or guaranteed just because restitution. Refusal should put them outside the you or your grandparents had it; if good people who protection of the law. In historical restitution-based believe in it don't work for it, teach it, insist on it and legal systems, this generally meant ostracism, support it, it can be easily lost. Have patience, be expulsion, or even death. In a modern society, courageous, stand on principle, sacrifice if necessary expulsion may be possible under limited for what you know to be right. Live for the future, not circumstances, but death for failure to pay a debt is merely for the here-and-now. Be optimistic because not likely to be … acceptable. Perhaps such offenders pessimism is a self-fulfilling prophecy; you can will be offered a choice between a specified prison change yourself if necessary and you can change the term in a conventional “nonproductive” prison facility world but not if you think either cause is lost before with few amenities or a prison work program you even get started. Keep your character up because accompanied by more amenities. If they decide to freedom requires it, and you'll never regret it. work, some portion of the resulting income can be - DAILY BELL Interview with Lawrence Reed, directed to cover room and board, some to restitution, August 10, 2014.

Load more