Kinsella On Liberty

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 334. A libertarian named Sebastian is researching the issue of "habeas data" from a libertarian perspective, and wanted to discuss with me. So we did. This involves issues and questions such as: Proposition: Habeas Data is emerging in some countries as a legal or constitutional writ predicated on a personal autonomy right to one's personal data. From a libertarian perspective, is this a type of bodily/personal autonomy "property" right? What if the data is held by a public official/state organization and the habeas data remedy is limited to access/correcton/deletion from a public database? Is this libertarian? Is our private data always private vis-a-vis the never claim-of-right of the State? Is that at odds with a bodily autonomy view of privacy/private property (information) rights? This is of interest as the Latin American/OAS writ is trending toward personal information as a kind of personal (bodily) autonomy right. What is the relation between Habeas Data and Right to Know/Right to Truth in Human Rights Law? How does the notion of Habeas Data relate to the libertarian critique of intellectual property and ownership of information? Related: Right to be forgotten My Louisiana Civil Law Dictionary From Sebastian: "A bit tangential but if Right to Truth ever includes Right to The Law: In Civil Law Systems, iura novit curia, or "The Court Knows the Law""

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 274-2. This is the Q&A panel following my talk [KOL274 | Nobody Owns Bitcoin (PFS 2019)] for the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society, Bodrum, Turkey (Sept. 12–17, 2019). For the four panelists' talks, see the Program, or the PFS 2019 YouTube Playlist. Transcript below. Q&A with Hülsmann, Dürr, Kinsella, Hoppe (PFS 2019) Unedited Transcript, with Guido Hülsmann, David Dürr, Stephan Kinsella, Hans-Hermann Hoppe Sept. 15, 2019 00:00:09 M (Rahim Taghizadegan): Hans, congratulations. Your speech was really good food for thought, and because I want to hear more of it, I’ll try to challenge you and just create a little bit. You made it seem as if going from a state of more culture as human beings to a state of culture somehow was a conscious agreement between human beings to find tools or artifices to reach the purposes. And to me it seems like too much of separation between nature and culture because we see among animals quite a lot of complicated languages. 00:00:43 I call them languages, of course nothing compared to the complexity of the human being. We see tools used by animals, and of course by our ancestors. So it looks more like a spectrum which emerged out of our nature, and of course then complexities or at some certain level of complexity you can call it a more interesting culture and a more complex culture. But I think you focus too much on the gulf between the nature and culture. 00:01:14 HANS-HERMANN HOPPE: I would doubt that we can speak of animals using instruments. We can give completely causal explanations for them doing certain things. It has also never happened that animals were constructing something that they cannot do by nature. Men can construct instruments that make him – enable him to do things that he could not do by nature. We can construct a car. We construct an airplane. Yes, we have beavers doing – building dams, but no beaver has ever done anything else but building dams or come up with, oh no, we just divert the flow of the river or something of that kind. 00:02:00 So the explanation that we can give for animal behavior, we would not need any reference to human or teleological vocabulary of goals and means and ends and success and failure. We can – we do that because sometimes we like animals and like to describe them in human terms, but we could easily explain all of that in causal terms just as much. Also, when animals learn something that they didn’t know how to do before like circus animals or something like that, that we can – again, this learning we can describe in a causal way—reinforcement, repetition, beating them, or not beating them, giving them a piece of sugar and whatever it is. We never need human terminology to explain their behavior, but in our case, we do. That is – that would be my point. 00:03:06 GUIDO HÜLSMANN: Actually, the naturalistic position can also be challenged that there are many natural phenomena that we cannot truly explain without a teleological element, such as the function of an eye for example. Whenever we talk of a function, an eye, a liver, any human organ, a cell, DNA, information content and so on, you cannot just – the old terminology cannot just explain this in terms of the material characteristics and the so-called efficient qualities so what came before, and then what came after. You need to have a teleological argument. 00:03:45 [Audience member]: I want to ask whether you will agree and perhaps expand upon this idea that another couple of good examples besides language are law, in particular, complex legal systems that emerge spontaneously over time. And I think that this argument actually was made by Hayek and Sudha Shenoy as well. And also, as a second example, as a second additional example, religion, and in particular one aspect of religion, that is, liturgy, different liturgies that embody sophisticated meanings that are transcendent. I think that these are another couple of examples that can work just as well as language. 00:04:36 HANS-HERMANN HOPPE: Of course I agree. I only took language, so to speak, the most important meta institution that makes lots of other institutions possible. So there’s no disagreement here. I – last year I spoke here for two hours, and I thought that might have been a little bit too much, so this time I wanted to be short and sweet. I don’t know if the sweet thing did occur, but short it was. There’s no disagreement whatsoever. I just didn’t have time to go through all other aspects of culture besides the aspect of language. 00:05:21 DAVID DÜRR: I would like to take your example of law, which interests me most. By the way, I’m not that much on your line, as you know, concerning this question, nature versus culture or however you call it. And I namely mean that the law could be an interesting example to make another viewpoint. Many speak about natural law, and this means something. This means that these are principles that have t

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 333. This is my interview by Jeff Tucker (Oct. 9, 2010), which preceded my first presentation of the Mises Academy course “Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics” (Nov.-Dec. 2010). For the second presentation in 2011, see KOL172 | “Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics: Lecture 1: History and Law” (Mises Academy, 2011). Transcript below. Youtube: https://youtu.be/-XlKNStzoLs Understanding IP: An Interview with Stephan Kinsella, Mises Daily (Oct. 21, 2010) 10/21/2010Jeffrey A. TuckerStephan Kinsella Jeffrey Tucker: Stephan Kinsella, it's a pleasure to have you here today. Welcome. Stephan Kinsella: Thank you. It's good to be here. Tucker: We're going to talk about your class for the Mises Academy, on intellectual property. Kinsella: Yes, I'm looking forward to it. We've been planning it for quite a while, as you know. I think the first course will be on November 1st for six weeks and then we'll take a week off. We'll have time to go in depth into many of the issues about intellectual property and its relationship to libertarianism, economic theory, and various other areas. Tucker: Why is this an important issue? Kinsella: Well, it's becoming a more and more important issue as we've seen in our circles and as seen on the internet. Daily, we see horror stories and crazy examples of abuses of IP. People are starting to wonder if these are really abuses of IP or if there's something wrong with IP itself. In the past, free-market economists and libertarians have sort of given this issue a pass. They took it for granted. It's been in a corner all by itself. Now people are wondering, and as we start looking more closely at it, we can see that a lot of the assumptions about IP have been wrong. Tucker: It's striking you mention the history of thought here and why this issue is sort of crystallizing in our time, especially with your pioneering monograph on that subject, Against Intellectual Property. It's generally true, isn't it, that that theoretical element of economics or law or whatever catches up when the practical need for that new theory comes along. For example, the theory of money and credit was made necessary by the advent of central banking. So, 50 years ago, IP wasn't that big a deal. Kinsella: I think that's completely true. Mises said something I've always loved. (Everyone focuses on a few of his statements that other people don't see, because he has so many great aphorisms and things.) He pointed out that in his view economics is purely deductive reasoning from a priori categories. Plus, then you explicitly introduce certain assumptions to make it interesting. [See my post Mises: Keep It Interesting.] "Interesting" was something I always focused on. So, in other words, we could talk hypothetically about a barter society forever, but it won't get us that far. So let's introduce the assumption that there is money in society. It's not a priori that there is money, but there could be money and, if there is, then certain things follow from it. I think that likewise in libertarian theory certain things become interesting at a certain point. In the past, as you mentioned in your talk yesterday here at the Supporters' Summit, it was not as easy as it is now to replicate information. There was sort of a tie in previous times between a good that was produced, like a book, and the information in it. The information in the book was in the physical copy of the book, so you could easily find a way to sell that. Now, with information being so easy to copy — And, of course, as Cory Doctorow mentions in one of his articles and speeches, do we think we are going to get to a point where it is going to get harder to copy and to spread information? No, it's only going to get easier. These things have made people confront the issue of the morality and the politics of sharing information. Tucker: It's not only technological advances, it's also dramatic changes in policy that have occurred over the last 15–20 years. Kinsella: Yes. Copyright and patent keep getting worse. The Western countries are twisting the arms of emerging economies like China to adopt a draconian Western-style intellectual property. This ACTA treaty that is coming up is terrible. It probably will be passed and it will impose protections around the world similar to what we have in the United States in the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act). Tucker: Is this enforced by the so-called World Intellectual Property Organization? Kinsella: The WTO will have a role in it, yes. The WTO is the World Trade Organization and the WIPO is the World Intellectual Property Organization. I'm not sure of their relationship to this. Tucker: But it's a UN organization, so you've got really international teeth growing here. Kinsella: Corr

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 332. I appeared yesterday (Friday, April 23, 2021) on the World Crypto Network (Youtube channel) panel The Bitcoin Group #255, hosted by Thomas Hunt. The other panelists included the CryptoRaptor (Dan Eve; see video below); Ben Arc; and Josh Scigala of Vaultoro. We discussed a variety of topics, including— Bitcoin Price Decline Deepens, Heads for Worst Week Since February Morgan Stanley Clients Hold Nearly $30M In Bitcoin Funds JPMorgan Sounds Urgent Alarm On Bitcoin Price ‘Momentum’ After $300 Billion Bitcoin And Crypto Sell-Off UK Court Agrees to Hear Copyright Lawsuit Brought by Self-Proclaimed Bitcoin Inventor Jack Dorsey and Elon Musk agree on bitcoin's green credentials Other related links: the Open Crypto Alliance, for which I serve on the Advisory Board Vijay Boyapati's upcoming book, based on his now-classic article "The Bullish Case for Bitcoin" (see this talk) My previous appearance at KOL323 | World Crypto Network: Announcing the Open Crypto Alliance to Protect Bitcoin, Blockchain and Crypto

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 331. This is my appearance on Phil Gibson's podcast A Boy Named Pseu. Youtube video: From Phil's shownotes: Stephan Kinsella is an attorney and libertarian writer. We discuss: Libertarianism Patents Trademarks Intellectual Property Economics [See Knowledge vs. Calculation] Bitcoin and then some…

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 330. Lift Talks #2 — With Kinsella & Sammeroff. Grok summary shownotes: In this episode of Lift Talks [0:00–26:36], Stephan Kinsella and Anthony Sammeroff recount their Telluride skiing trip with humor and libertarian flair. They start by discussing a catered dinner party [1:02–2:23], where mask mandates were dismissed, and vaccine reactions sparked debate, reflecting their data-driven skepticism. Their conversation shifts to political labels [4:09–5:03], criticizing "liberals" and "progressives" while noting a natural affinity with conservatives over Democrats. They recap their journey from Houston to Auburn, Alabama [6:23–9:43], meeting libertarian figures like Jeff Barr and Roderick Long, and share gossip about factionalism in libertarian circles [10:00–12:45]. On the slopes, they enjoy fast runs like the Enchanted Forest [25:38–26:36], blending personal anecdotes with critiques of cultural norms. From [26:57–1:03:59], the duo dives deeper into libertarian philosophy and personal stories. Anthony shares a slope mishap where he jokingly insulted a stranger, mistaking him for Stephan [39:12–40:27], and they laugh over a gondola line encounter with a woman claiming cancer [47:24–49:53]. They reflect on intellectual curiosity [41:04–43:55], with Anthony linking his reasoning to a challenging upbringing, and Stephan joking about being "bitten by a radioactive Rothbard." They decide against extending their stay after Anthony’s skiing wrecks [51:21–58:39], opting for a final meal at West End Bistro [56:16–1:00:29], where they discuss truffle fries and libertarian ethics. The episode closes with a playful coffee shop exchange about Robert Redford [1:00:40–1:02:53], wrapping up with a montage of their top skiing speeds and a farewell from Stephan’s porch [1:03:01–1:03:59], leaving listeners with a mix of humor, philosophy, and adventure. Grok detailed shownotes and Transcript below. Update: mentioned in KOL462 | CouchStreams After Hours on Break the Cycle with Joshua Smith (2021). Two libertarian blokes on a ski vacation. Filmed Wednesday, March 31, 2021, Telluride Ski Resort. https://youtu.be/W-zKMncu4jo?si=dN9mgW-dkVbx-Btf Part 1: KOL329 | Lift Talks #1 With Kinsella & Sammeroff https://youtu.be/d1ZY0xm7coY?si=1rIL4Na8jnis4x_P Cross-posted on Scottish Liberty podcast. Bonus video: Three day skiing video compilation telluride March 2021 Grok detailed shownotes Bullet-Point Summary with Time Markers and Descriptions for 10–15 Minute Blocks Below is a bullet-point summary for use as show notes, organized into 10–15 minute blocks, each with a description and key points from the conversation, including time markers for significant moments. 0:00–14:46: Introduction and Trip Recap Description: The episode opens with Stephan and Anthony on a ski lift in Telluride, setting a casual, humorous tone. They share photos and stories from their trip, starting with a dinner party and moving into a recap of their travels from Houston to Auburn, Alabama, and then to Telluride. The conversation blends libertarian commentary with personal anecdotes, including mask mandate debates and libertarian gossip. Key Points: [0:00–0:24] Photos of the group in Telluride, including hot tub moments. [1:02–2:23] Discussion of a catered dinner party where mask mandates were dismissed, and vaccine reactions were debated, with a jab at "data deniers." [3:00–4:14] Anthony’s frustration at being late to ski, blaming Stephan’s leisurely pace. [4:09–5:03] Critique of political labels like "liberals" and "progressives," noting a closer affinity with conservatives. [6:23–8:58] Recap of their Auburn visit, meeting libertarian figures like Jeff Barr and Roderick Long, with Anthony excited about being recognized. [9:43–12:45] Libertarian gossip about Roderick Long’s alleged excommunication from the Mises Institute and Stephan’s cancellation by Cato, with humorous asides about factionalism. [13:15–14:46] Light-hearted banter about Anthony’s wife and their decision to ski in Telluride, with Anthony surprising Stephan by knowing how to ski. 14:46–29:04: Skiing Adventures and Cultural Reflections Description: The conversation shifts to their skiing experiences, with Stephan and Anthony enjoying the slopes and reflecting on cultural differences. They discuss a dinner party’s etiquette, libertarian philosophy, and Anthony’s decision to extend the trip. The segment is filled with humor, including jabs at each other’s personalities and social media antics. Key Points: [15:21–16:56] Discussion of the episode’s potential popularity, with Anthony arguing that casual chats humanize them compared to dense libertarian theory. [17:46–20:55] Travel logistics, including a stressful airport experience and cultural differences at a hotel breakfast, with Anthony snapping at a waiter. [22:14–24:34] Arrival in Telluride, with a visit to clothing-optional hot springs and a swe

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 329. Lift Talks #1 —Telluride March 2021 — With Kinsella & Sammeroff. Two libertarian blokes on a ski vacation. Filmed Tuesday March 30, 2021, Telluride Ski Resort. Grok summary shownotes: In the "Lift Talks" episode recorded in Telluride, Colorado, Stephan Kinsella and Anthony Sammeroff deliver a dynamic conversation while riding ski lifts, starting with humorous reflections on their trip [0:00-9:00]. They discuss their skiing adventures, hot springs visits, and encounters with COVID-19 mask policies, including a tense plane incident involving a dropped tissue and a stewardess enforcing federal mask laws [3:46-5:57]. Their libertarian perspective shines through as they mock passive-aggressive mask enforcers and recount a refreshing interaction with a store clerk who opposed mask mandates [6:09-7:06]. The hosts also share personal stories, like Sammeroff’s flirtatious banter about a vegan woman and a chance meeting with a friend from a yoga retreat, highlighting cultural differences between American and European directness [7:12-8:27]. The conversation deepens as they explore libertarian philosophy and critique political ideologies [21:11-36:29]. They debate the right’s realism versus the left’s egalitarianism, asserting that libertarians provide intellectual foundations often stolen by conservatives [21:17-22:28]. A discussion with guest Peggy around [44:02-48:46] reveals her partial alignment with libertarianism but concerns about policing without government, prompting Kinsella and Sammeroff to advocate for privatized security and critique public sector failures, like a case where police neglected rape victims [47:36-48:25]. The episode concludes with reflections on their friendship, Sammeroff’s newfound opportunities in America, and plans for future episodes, all infused with humor and philosophical insights [50:01-54:45]. Grok detailed shownotes and Transcript below. [Update: Tom Woods and Antony discuss his travels across American in Ep. 1895 Traveling Through COVID America. Also mentioned in KOL462 | CouchStreams After Hours on Break the Cycle with Joshua Smith (2021).] https://youtu.be/d1ZY0xm7coY?si=PJCg8cJDL3yxYjSl Part 2: KOL330 | Lift Talks #2 With Kinsella & Sammeroff https://youtu.be/W-zKMncu4jo?si=u_4smoT1fG-IchTC Cross-posted on Scottish Liberty podcast. Bonus video: Three day skiing video compilation telluride March 2021 Grok detailed shownotes Bullet-Point Summary with Time Markers and Descriptions for 10-15 Minute Blocks 0:00-10:00: Introduction and Ski Trip Anecdotes Description: The episode opens with Stephan Kinsella and Anthony Sammeroff introducing their "Lift Talks" concept while riding a gondola in Telluride, Colorado. They share photos from their trip, including hot springs visits and skiing with hosts Peggy and David. The conversation is lighthearted, focusing on their skiing experiences and humorous takes on mask enforcement. Summary: The hosts discuss their first two days skiing, including a visit to Orvis Hot Springs and a funny incident where Sammeroff struggled with the COVID-19 vaccine’s effects [2:00-2:12]. They recount a plane incident where a couple and stewardess chided Sammeroff for not wearing his mask properly [3:46-5:04], reflecting their libertarian disdain for mandates. They also mention meeting a store clerk who opposed masks, revealing a shared skepticism [6:09-7:06]. 10:01-20:00: Libertarian Banter and Cultural Observations Description: The hosts continue their lift ride, joking about their skiing skills, privilege, and cultural differences between Americans and Europeans. They touch on libertarian figures like Jeffrey Tucker and share stories from hot springs, including an encounter with a Native American man spouting spiritual beliefs. Summary: Sammeroff and Kinsella playfully debate their skiing prowess and privilege [10:00-10:26], with Sammeroff joking about needing a “privilege diet.” They critique American passive-aggressiveness compared to European directness [5:22-5:57] and recount a hot springs visit where a Native American man preached about rock and water [16:56-17:26]. The conversation briefly turns philosophical, questioning objective reality, but they pivot back to humor [18:19-18:30]. 20:01-30:00: Political Philosophy and Right vs. Left Critique Description: The discussion shifts to political theory, with the hosts critiquing the right’s realism and the left’s egalitarianism. They argue that libertarians provide intellectual foundations for conservatives, who often dismiss them. They also share stories from their travels, including an Uber driver’s shift toward free-market ideas. Summary: Kinsella and Sammeroff challenge Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s view that the right is more realistic, arguing that conservatives co-opt libertarian ideas without gratitude [21:17-22:28]. They discuss an Uber driver in Auburn who moved from Democratic to free-market sympathies after researching Trump [39:26-4

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 328. This is my appearance on Heterodorx Episode 10: I.P. Everywhere!, hosted by Nina Paley and Corinna Cohn (posted March 29, 2021; recorded March 25, 2021). Nina is also on the C4SIF Advisory Board. From the shownotes (see also Nina's Facebook post): Get ready for some hardcore Libertarian nerd-talk, as Corinna goes head-to-head with Stephan Kinsella, author of Against Intellectual Property, and Libertarianism’s foremost critic of copyright and patents. Thrill to dazzling theories of labor vs. action, restrictive covenants, negative easements, burdened estates, nuisances, limitations, consent, redistribution of rights, triangular intervention, property, scarcity, value, allocation of contestable resources, conflict, trade secrets, the Patent Bargain, disclosure, distortion, abolishing the FDA…wait, what? By the end of the episode, Corinna suffers a long-overdue crisis of faith. SUCCESS! Related links: Stephan Kinsella, Against Intellectual Property C4SIF.org Resources http://c4sif.org/resources/ Intellectual Property Rights as Negative Servitudes Karl Fogel:The Surprising History of Copyright and The Promise of a Post-Copyright World and https://youtu.be/mhBpI13dxkI Boldrin & Levine, Against Intellectual Monopoly “Conversation with an author about copyright and publishing in a free society” (Harry Potter example) “Intellectual Property” as an umbrella term and as propaganda: a reply to Richard Stallman A Selection of Kinsella’s Best Articles and Speeches on IP

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 327. I was asked some questions about intellectual property, and how you can sell something (like information, or ideas, or even your labor) if you don't own it, by Shea Fisker, a budding libertarian and fellow libertarian. He had just the right attitude. He listened and thought, and asked reasonable questions when he had an issue that puzzled him. Would that so many cocksure pro-IP libertarians, who really know almost nothing about IP law itself and the fundamentals of libertarian property theory, or even how to argue or discuss issues without being tendentious, equivocating, or question-begging. Youtube below: Here is the interchange which led to this discussion (lightly edited), along with related links: Shea: Hi Stephan, I’m interested in your work on IP. If someone is creating digital products, do you think it’s OK to sell them, even though they are neither non-rivalrous nor non-excludable, simply with IP removed from the picture? For example, I noticed most of your books are in physical form, embodying legit private property, but one of your books is available in Kindle and isn’t for free. Is the thought simply that selling such an informational, non-physical product is purely a voluntary, contractual exchange, and that it is only the stopping of people from freely sharing that good with others after that purchase (IP) that is wrong? There’s seemingly something tricky about even the selling of the thing, say a piece of software, when the creator could hardly be considered the owner of it in the first place. But, perhaps I am confusing something here, because to say someone couldn’t even sell a digital/informational product that they created, IP aside, seems akin to some sort of enforced communism. I hope that makes sense. I’d love to hear your thoughts. BTW, I’m from New Iberia and went to LSU in BR. In one way, it is analogous to say, charging someone for consulting, which is simply the exchange of words, which one can’t be said to own. And to say one couldn’t legitimately (according to libertarian principles) sell a digital product at scale, would be equivalent to saying one must be forced to do all consulting publicly for the whole world to consume anytime that one tries to privately exchange a one-to-one service that isn’t physical. So I think I aiming to clarify two things here and am somehow wrongly mixing them up: 1) the physical vs. non-physical; and 2) IP vs. selling. I am still not sure where the concept of ownership fits in here, but if we grant that selling of anything that doesn’t violate other peoples’ property is fine, then it shouldn’t matter whether the thing is scarce or not as to whether one can sell it for money. In other words, I could charge you $1000 for me to tell you “Hello” one time, if you consent to that exchange. *** Not to overload you here straight out the gate, but in one of your PorcFest talks I just heard you say “Creation is not a source of property, it’s a source of wealth.” I think this point may be key in the issues I’m bringing up above. Kinsella: It would take me a bit to write up an answer. Tell you what, I'll be happy to explain it to you, but on a zoom call so I can record it and put it on my podcast, so others can hear the explanation.... In the meantime read this: The “If you own something, that implies that you can sell it; if you sell something, that implies you must own it first” Fallacies Hoppe on Property Rights in Physical Integrity vs Value Locke on IP; Mises, Rothbard, and Rand on Creation, Production, and ‘Rearranging’ see p. 29 et pass of Law and Intellectual Property in a Stateless Society “Intellectual Freedom and Learning Versus Patent and Copyright,” esp. the section "Creation of Wealth versus Creation of Property" and KOL062 | “Intellectual Freedom and Learning versus Patent and Copyright” (2010)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 326. [Update: Transcript appended below] Back on May 24, 2020, I appeared on the Scottish Liberty Podcast, with hosts Antony Sammeroff and Tom Laird. We discussed IP and related matters, including Sammeroff’s recent debate on the topic of IP with pro-IP Randian law professor Adam Mossoff. I was a bit drunk and it shows, and went off on a rant and was not as coherent as usual. The episode was entitled "Under the Influence... of Stephan Kinsella... Against Intellectual Property". We recorded a second episode on May 30, 2020, entitled "A Sober Conversation with Stephan Kinsella...," which was released as KOL289. I just realized I never posted the initial episode, so here it is, warts and all (unfortunately for fans of my drunken rants, I have quit drinking alcohol since I realized it's a destructive poison with no benefits at all, so this won't happen again). Previous episode: KOL289 | Scottish Liberty Podcast: Discussing the Mossoff-Sammeroff IP Debate, Take 2: A Sober Conversation… See various links, embeds, notes below. Youtube of the current discussion: Previous Youtube from KOL289. Antony’s previous debate with Mossoff: In his remarks, Mossoff mentioned this paper by Stephen Haber as supporting the empirical case for patents (funny, I thought the Objectivists had principles): Stephen Haber, “Patents and the Wealth of Nations,” 23 Geo. Mason L.Rev. 811 (2016). I have read through it as much as I can stand and provide my critical commentary here: “The Overwhelming Empirical Case Against Patent and Copyright”–see in particular note 3 and accompanying text. ❧ Transcript Scottish Liberty Podcast: Discussing the Mossoff-Sammeroff IP Debate, Take 1: Under the Influence of Stephan Kinsella: Against Intellectual Property (May 21, 2020) [Transcript of "Scottish Liberty Podcast: Discussing the Mossoff-Sammeroff IP Debate, Take 1: Under the Influence..." (May 21, 2020)] 00:00:03 TOM LAIRD: Welcome to episode 155 of the Scottish Liberty podcast with me, Tom Laird and, of course, the man who can, Antony Sammeroff. 00:00:13 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: That’s me. 00:00:13 TOM LAIRD: And possibly the man who can, Stephen Kinsella, big hitter from the Mises Institute and patent lawyer extraordinaire, and there he goes. 00:00:25 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: Author of Against Intellectual Property, a very influential book in the libertarian movement I have to say. 00:00:33 STEPHAN KINSELLA: The most intellectual book, and get my name right. Let’s say Stephan. Let’s say it. Okay, can you guys say with me Stephanie? Say it with me, Stephanie. 00:00:43 TOM LAIRD: Stephanie. 00:00:44 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Okay. Take off the E. Stephan. 00:00:47 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: Stephan. Did you call him Stephen Kinsella? Did you call him – did you actually call him Stephen Kinsella in the intro? 00:00:55 TOM LAIRD: Who? 00:00:55 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Yeah, he did. It’s fine. I’m used to it. I’m used to it. 00:00:59 TOM LAIRD: It you want it pronounced differently, spell it differently. 00:01:03 00:01:05 STEPHAN KINSELLA: You can’t blame someone’s mother – so this is the thing. You can’t blame their mother, man. You’ve got to – there’s boundaries. 00:01:13 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: Well, I know. I blame my mom for tons of shit. 00:01:17 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Like what? 00:01:18 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: I don’t know if I should say it publicly. 00:01:25 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Well, then don’t tease us. Come on. 00:01:27 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: My ex-girlfriend blamed my mom’s mom for tons of shit as well. 00:01:33 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Like what? Give me one example, just one. 00:01:36 00:01:39 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: I don’t – right at the beginning of the show? There might be new listeners tuning from Twitter. I tell you what. They’ll have to actually start one of those websites where they vote. If 100 people sign the petition, Antony will disclose embarrassing details of the way that his mom scarred him in childhood. 00:01:58 STEPHAN KINSELLA: You are so sweet. You Scottish people are so sweet. 00:02:03 TOM LAIRD: Well, look. It can’t get any more embarrassing than your pimp’s cushion that you’ve got behind you there. 00:02:09 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: Do you like that? Look, I’ve got a nice set. For those of you who are on… 00:02:14 STEPHAN KINSELLA: It’s like a – is it a Bengal tiger or what the hell is that? 00:02:18 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: For those of you listening through your podcast app, I am actually setting up against a leopard skin – leopard pillow. 00:02:27 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Do you have a Jabra too? You have a Jabra too. We’re both Jabra – Jabra buddies. 00:02:32 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: Jabra. That’s really funny. When I was in college, there was a group of weird jock guys that started calling me Tony Jabroni for some reason just because it rhymed. It doesn’t even mean anything. They just liked it. And now I’m a real jabroni, Jabro. I put the bro in Jabra. 00:02:53 STEPHAN KINSELLA: So when you say you went to college, what did you go to colle

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 325. This is my appearance on the Nate the Voluntaryist Livestream #202, released March 15, 2021 (Nate’s Bitchute channel). Shownotes: "Stephan Kinsella is back for more about Hoppe and who will succeed him in the world of Austrian economics, plus a Q&A." Previous appearance: KOL311 | Nate the Voluntaryist Livestream #194: IP, the CDA, DMCA, Argumentation Ethics, and More

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 324. I was on Aleks Svetski's show Wake Up, Ep. 37. Youtube: From his shownotes: Stephan Kinsella is a Patent Attorney in Texas, Austrian AnCap philosopher, writer & hands down one of the smarter & most well-read people I've ever spoken to. In this ep, we discuss: - SK's Journey on Why or how he become a libertarian - Where Austrian Econ fit in? - A little about Bitcoin coming on the radar, and "fixing this". We discuss consistency of thought, principles and ideas. A little on Patent Law & Private property, although we'll probably do an Ep 2 in this. We explore: - Rand's critique on Anarchy - Rand's support of IP The difference between ownership & possession - Is Ownership is that which you can protect? - How do you prove initial possession? - How do you enforce ownership? Are the rules & norms of a community or city a sort of constitution? How do these rules scale across populations? How do you synchronise those larger scale ideas with societies that have different values, ie; the Confucian east? War is expensive only with sound money (Bitcoin fixes this) We dig into a bit about private property rights from both the Lockean view & a more tangible viewpoint inspired by Hoppe. "The entire point of property rights is to solve conflict." And I ask the question: Why are Libertarians not as widely thrilled about Bitcoin as one might expect them to be? There was a series of books that Stephan also mentioned. I've listed them here for you: Walter Block: I chose liberty - Assortment of stories about how people became libertarians. Randy Barnett - The structure of Liberty Hoppe - A theory of Socialism & Capitalism - Economics & ethics of Private property Mises: - Ultimate foundation of economic science Rothbard: - The logic of action 1 & 2 - Economic controversies

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 323. Jed Grant and I appeared on the World Crypto Network channel with host Thomas Hunt to discuss the looming patent threat to bitcoin. Jed is Founder of the Open Crypto Alliance, for which I serve on the Advisory Board. Shownotes: Patents help protect the intellectual property of inventors and creators, but on occasion those same creators choose to make their works available to everyone, free of charge. Unfortunately, some predatory entities, known as patent trolls, prey on the users of these technologies through the civil courts. Their latest target? Cryptocurrency and blockchain technology, which is why blockchain industry leaders and legal experts – including today’s guests, Stephan Kinsella & Jed Grant – have come together to form the Open Crypto Alliance, a group dedicated to preserving cryptocurrency & bitcoin technology’s open-source origins.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 322. From the Bitcoin Within The Legal System event, part of the Crypt0Events “Future IS Crypto!” Webinar Series (February 25, 2021). Jed Grant and I discussed the looming patent threat to bitcoin. Jed is Founder of the Open Crypto Alliance, for which I serve on the Advisory Board. Eleonore Blanc was also on the panel. Video below:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 321. This is my appearance The Tatiana Show, episode 296, with host Tatiana Moroz, in which Jed Grant and I discussed the looming patent threat to bitcoin. Jed is Founder of the Open Crypto Alliance, for which I serve on the Advisory Board. Tatiana’s shownotes below. The Youtube video is here:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 320. From my recent appearance on Stephan Livera’s bitcoin-focused podcast, SLP249 BITCOIN PATENTS & OPEN CRYPTO ALLIANCE WITH STEPHAN KINSELLA AND JED GRANT (recorded Feb. 2, 2021; released Feb. 5, 2021). [Update: See transcript here, and appended below] From the show notes: Stephan Kinsella and Jed Grant join me to chat about Open Crypto Alliance. We talk: Why IP laws are anti-liberty and anti-progress How progress has been delayed by improper concepts of property rights How Patent laws could hinder the Bitcoin industry The asymmetry of attack vs defense here How to stop overly broad patents How to support OCA Guest links: Site: https://www.opencryptoalliance.org/ Stephan twitter: @NSKinsella Jed twitter: @JediGrant Prior episodes: SLP15 – Intellectual Property, Bitcoin, and Internet Censorship, with Stephan Kinsella SLP211 Steve Lee – Bitcoin Grants, Design & Crypto Patents (COPA) *** Transcript Podcast Transcript: dcasStephan Livera: Stephan and Jed, welcome to the show. Jed Grant: Thank you. Thanks for having us. Stephan Kinsella: Thanks Stephan. Stephan Livera: Today. We’re going to talk a little bit about intellectual property and what it means in terms of Bitcoin and property rights as well. I think many listeners of the show are libertarians themselves, but not all of them. And so I think it might be good. Well, firstly let’s talk, let’s hear a little bit about each of you just a little bit on your background. Jed, if you want to start? Jed Grant: Sure. Yeah, I’m a technologist I’ve been in tech. Well, since the eighties, when I got my hands on an Apple II and started writing code I’ve always been interested in cryptography. Somewhat of a cypherpunk, ended up at NATO running their deployment of TCP IP in the nineties and been an entrepreneur for the last 20, 22 years, more or less and focused on, on security and crypto and technology in that space. So Bitcoin is something that I’ve been following since basically when the white paper came out as a novelty and really liked the tech and want to see it change the world. So that’s sort of my focus. For my professional side. I run a company called KYC 3 and I set out to change the way we do KYC because it’s fundamentally broken. So somewhat similar to what Stephan’s going to say. I’m not a lawyer, but I’m a KYC guy, but I’m anti KYC. So there you have it. Stephan Livera: And Stephan, just for listeners who maybe they haven’t heard you before. Can you tell us a little bit about yourself? Stephan Kinsella: Sure yeah, I’m a patent attorney in Houston and Texas, I’m from Louisiana originally and I’m a libertarian and I’ve been interested in libertarian theory and intellectual property stuff for a long time now. And got interested in Bitcoin when it came out and started buying it when I lost a bet to Vijay Boyapati, because I thought in 2012 that the government would kill it. So I lost that bet had to buy some Bitcoins to pay them off. So I bought some for me at the same time. So those Bitcoins are now worth 90,000 or now, $120,000 that I gave him. Stephan Livera: Yeah, that’s great. Vijay our mutual friend, he’s a regular guest on my show. And for listeners who aren’t familiar, Stephan is a really leading thinker in the libertarian world especially in the areas of intellectual property. And also just generally in terms of private property theory and explaining some of the thought of some of the leading lights of the Austrian libertarian world, such as Hans Hoppe and others. I think maybe we can start there as well, because I think for some people they might not be as familiar with this way of thinking and they might be thinking, well, hang on. I thought these people put in work to create intellectual property. So why shouldn’t that also be respected as a quote unquote private property, right? Why is that not correct? Stephan Kinsella: Right. And I guess I thought that too at first, like most people do I mean I come at it from a private property point of view, I favour free markets and private property and individual Liberty capitalism and all that. And I still am and innovation and technology. And you hear about this thing called intellectual property, which includes mainly patent and copyright, which covers inventions and artistic works. And you just assume that, well, this is another type of property rights. It was part of capitalism, but the more I studied the issue and when I started practicing, practicing it in the early nineties as a lawyer. I started looking into it more closely understanding the legal system and then understanding libertarian and economic arguments about it more deeply, came to the conclusion that the systems are completely antithetical to private property and free markets and competition, and it should be abolished. Stephan Kinsella: I mean, completely, I think the patent system and the copyright system are completely unjustified and do tons of harm in the world, especially the patent sys

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 319. This is Part II of my appearance on Keith Knight’s Youtube show “Don’t Tread on Anyone” (Feb. 3, 2021), discussing my “Libertarian Litmus Test” post on Facebook. In this second hour or so of our discussion, we covered "Logic, Exploitation, Homesteading, & Freedom", and other issues (see below). See also KOL318 | The Libertarianism Litmus Test, Part 1 – With Keith Knight, “Don’t Tread on Anyone”. Time-markers: 0:00 - Logic v. Empiricism / Deontologicalism v. Utilitarianism 10:29 - Exploitation debate 11:34 - Who are the libertarian allies? 13:45 - Homesteading aka Original Appropriation 18:33 - Should I have to work to live? 21:52 - Personal v. Private property 32:05 - Socialist shortages 36:32 - Labor Theory of Value 50:05 - Order Givers v. Order Followers 1:00:53 - What is freedom?

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 318. This is my appearance on Keith Knight’s Youtube show “Don’t Tread on Anyone” (Feb. 3, 2021), discussing my "Libertarian Litmus Test" post on Facebook: Time to update the libertarian litmus test: To be a solid libertarian, you must be good on the following (ranked roughly in order of importance/obviousness): 1. IP 2. central banking/the Fed 3. taxation 4. the drug war 5. war 6. welfare 7. government education 8. the state (anarchist) 9. and now, covid lockdowns (no offense, paranoid and "respectable" libertards) I'll let you slide on one issue ("one deviation"), but one only. But you miss two, and you're relegated to Time Out. Youtube embedded below. See also KOL319 | The Libertarianism Litmus Test, Part 2 – With Keith Knight, “Don’t Tread on Anyone” Time markers: 0:00 - What is libertarianism? 2:19 - Intellectual Property 6:07 - History of IP 13:05 - Central banking 16:11 - Taxation 18:06 - Drug war 20:30 - War 22:39 - Welfare 24:28 - State education 27:54 - The state 31:12 - Lockdowns 34:09 - A Proper understanding of socialism and capitalism 43:35 - Most important contributions of…. Carl Menger Eugen von Bohm-Bawerk: Shorter Classics - chapter II, "WHETHER LEGAL RIGHTS AND RELATIONSHIPS ARE ECONOMIC GOODS" Ludwig von Mises -- UFOES F.A. Hayek -- not a big fan Murray N. Rothbard- Economic Controversies Walter Block Lew Rockwell -- The Free Market Reader

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 317. This is my appearance on Decentralized Revolution (the LP Mises Caucus podcast), episode 46, with host Aaron Harris. We discussed the Libertarian Party, IP, the incoming Biden administration, the GameStop/Robinhood story, and the work of Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 316. At the prodding of Peter Schiff's son, who, unlike his dad, is anarchist, pro-bitcoin, and opposed to intellectual property, I had a discussion with Peter about IP. Didn't fully succeed in converting him to the anti-IP cause, but made a bit of headway. We also talked a bit about bitcoin, and the Saipan and Puerto Rico tax breaks available to Americans. It begins a bit abruptly, since we were chatting initially before I had started on the IP topic and we began talking about bitcoin, and it didn't seem like it was going to quickly end, so I hit record and we talked about bitcoin before getting around to IP and a few other topics like defamation, Saipan, etc. Additional resources: Kinsella, Intellectual Property and Libertarianism“ ———, “Legal Scholars: Thumbs Down on Patent and Copyright” (Oct. 23, 2012) ———, “The Overwhelming Empirical Case Against Patent and Copyright” (Oct. 23, 2012) Boldrin & Levine, Against Intellectual Monopoly Boldrin and Levine: The Case Against Patents The Effects of Patent and Copyright on Hollywood Movies

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 315. This is my appearance on the Rollo & Slappy Show Episode 236 – The Libertarian Analysis of the GameStop Short Squeeze and Fallout with Silent Cal, JW Weatherman, and Stephan Kinsella. "There have been plenty of hot takes on what went down with the GameStop short squeeze by Wall Street Bets traders from Reddit and the fallout following the actions of Robinhood. It can get pretty technical, so we brought three guests, Silent Cal, JW Weatherman, and Stephan Kinsella, on to the show to unpack what happened and how we might analyze it from a libertarian perspective." We talked about bitcoin after recording stopped, JW and I trying to sell Silent Cal on it. Items mentioned Silent Cal’s Twitter thread Episode 177 – Stocks, Dumb Money, and Bitcoin Yeticold.com Follow the guests Silent Cal JW Weatherman Stephan Kinsella

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 314. This is Episode 28 of The Bitcoin Standard Podcast, in which Jed Grant and I guest-lectured on the topic of intellectual property and bitcoin, for the course “Principles of Economics II, conducted by Dr. Saifedean Ammous, author of The Bitcoin Standard, for The Bitcoin Standard Academy (Jan. 21, 2021). Jed is Founder of the Open Crypto Alliance, for which I serve on the Advisory Board. The video is here and Youtube below. [fvplayer id="2"]

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 313. This is my appearance on Voluntaryist Haven, fielding various questions from Zane Mooneyhan and others, about argumentation ethics and other matters.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 312. Back in 2013, Michael Shanklin posted a Youtube video, Anarchy Rising: Part 2, and asked other libertarian anarchists to send in a short video response on why they are a voluntaryist or libertarian. I believe he was going to use the submitted videos in some kind of montage. He never did the montage AFAIK and he made his video private for some reason—a habit annoyingly common among libertarians: they publish some articles or other content for years, and then later they take it down or demand that the publisher take it down, when they are applying for a job or something (sometimes later, they change their mind and pester the poor publisher again and ask him to "put them back up"). Yeah. You're so important. Whatever. Anyway, I did a video response while taking a walk one morning. It's only 5 minutes but provides a brief summary of how I view libertarianism. I had forgotten about it but just received a recent comment by one Steven Barendregt: "7 years later and I think this video is still the best BRIEF explanation of libertarianism that I've ever seen. Truly underrated video." So I decided to add it to my podcast feed here in case anyone else finds it of interest. Enjoy. Previous podcast episodes with Shanklin (whom I believe has since defriended me, because I was not a radical enough lifestyle libertarian or activist or some stupid libertard serioso shit like that): KOL 043 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Bitcoin, Legal Reform, Morality of Voting, Rothbard on Copyright KOL 025 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Intellectual Property, Ron Paul vs RonPaul.Com, Aaron Swartz, Corporatism. Other video replies to Anarchy Rising: Part 2:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 311. This is my appearance on the Nate the Voluntaryist Livestream #194, from Jan. 5, 2021 (Nate's Bitchute channel). We discussed intellectual property, section 230 of the CDA and the DMCA, argumentation ethics, and Q&A from the audience. Youtube: https://youtu.be/nKZOQk-iqpI Nate's streaming audio:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 310. This is my appearance on the Nate the Voluntaryist Livestream #154, from Aug. 27, 2020 (his Bitchute channel). I forgot to mirror it on my stream last year, so remedying that now. Apparently, according to the show notes, we discussed "argumentation ethics, property rights, Hoppeanism, and more!" https://www.bitchute.com/video/Fp4kpsBFo7ek/

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 309. This is my appearance on the Nate the Voluntaryist Livestream #81, from Jan. 7, 2020 (his Bitchute channel). I forgot to mirror it on my stream last year, so remedying that now, though I don't recall what we discussed. Surprise episode! https://www.bitchute.com/video/Fp4kpsBFo7ek/

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 308. This is my appearance on John Stossel’s Fox Business News show, Stossel, back on Jan. 30, 2015. I just realized I had never put it here in my podcast feed, so here it is. The full episode is streamed below (I recommend also my friend David Koepsell's segment); my audio clip is included in this podcast episode. Discussed further in KOL171 | With Albert Lu Discussing Stossel and IP. Grok shownotes and transcript below. From: Stossel Show on Intellectual Property *** A few weeks ago I was invited to appear on an upcoming episode of John Stossel's Fox Business News show, Stossel. I flew to New York last Wednesday for a Thursday taping; the show will air this Friday, Jan. 30. I had a great time. Had dinner with several local libertarian friends (David Kramer, Isaac Bergmann, Evan Isaac, etc.) and my long-time friend Jack Criss, who joined me on the trip. Spent a while seeing New York, with my friend Dante Bayona as a helpful guide. New York was cold, but we still enjoyed it. (Pix from the trip below.) The taping on Thursday went well—I was nervous but think I did okay. There were five guests altogether. The first segment was a debate between anti-IP anarchist David Koepsell and a conventional IP attorney; then a magician who was upset about people "stealing" his magic tricks; then me; then Chris Sprigman, about whom I've written before. I was a little leery that this was kind of a setup or something, but Stossel and the Fox News staff could not have been nicer or more professional. My impression is Stossel is leaning our way, as indicated in his Reason post, which quote me and Koepsell and criticizes IP (Owning Ideas—An Outdated Idea?; see also his column Owning Ideas). As far as I know this is the first time IP has been examined in such a major, national forum, and from a principled, and radical, free market perspective. Kudos to Stossel. More on Stossel's show here. The episode airs 9pm EST this Friday night, Jan. 30, on Fox Business, and apparently re-airs on Fox News Channel Sunday night. Pix *** Grok summary: Show Notes: KOL308 | Stossel: It’s My Idea! (2015) with Stephan Kinsella and Guests Introduction to Intellectual Property and Piracy Concerns [0:01–1:00] John Stossel opens the episode by addressing the issue of piracy, noting that The Wolf of Wall Street was the most illegally downloaded movie in 2014, highlighting Hollywood’s and musicians’ struggles with unauthorized copying. He explains that U.S. law grants creators exclusive rights to songs, books, movies, and paintings to foster innovation through a limited period of exclusivity. Stossel illustrates this with a clip from a gangster movie where Denzel Washington’s character defends his drug brand “Blue Magic” as a trademark, emphasizing the value of brand identity. He introduces the debate by questioning whether watching his show on YouTube constitutes stealing, setting the stage for a discussion on intellectual property (IP) with guests including David Koepsell, Lawrence Suskind, Rick Lax, Stephan Kinsella, Chris Sprigman, and Doug Stanhope. The Role of IP in Encouraging Innovation [1:00–3:13] Stossel frames the historical significance of ideas, crediting innovations like the printing press and electricity for improving billions of lives. He poses the problem: why invest years in creating if others can copy the idea and undercut prices? Using a light bulb invention example from filmmaker Kirby Ferguson, he argues that without recouping development costs, creators may be discouraged. Stossel explains that copyrights and patents were introduced to address this by granting temporary exclusivity—copyrights for media, patents for inventions. He notes the extension of copyright terms over time, from 28 years in 1831 to the author’s life plus 70 years by 1998, which David Koepsell criticizes as excessive, advocating for the abolition of all IP rights, while Lawrence Suskind, an IP attorney, defends their necessity. Debating Copyrights and Moral Rights [3:13–11:22] The first segment features a debate between David Koepsell, who opposes IP, and Lawrence Suskind, who supports it. Koepsell argues that creators like Shakespeare thrived without copyright, profiting through reputation and performances, as ideas are non-scarce and IP laws stifle free expression. Suskind counters that creators have a moral right to protect their work, akin to a farmer’s right to land, and cites Shakespeare’s harsh measures against play pirates. Koepsell highlights software developers opting out of IP, relying on brand strength, while Suskind defends pharmaceutical patents due to high R&D costs. The discussion touches on music copyright issues, referencing George Harrison’s $1.5 million lawsuit for “subconsciously” copying “He’s So Fine” in “My Sweet Lord.” Stossel critiques Disney’s lobbying to extend copyrights for works like Snow White, which Koepsell calls cronyism, noting that public domain stories a

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 307. This is my appearance on the Ernie Hancock “Declare your Independence” show for Dec. 17, 2020 (Hour 2). We discussed Intellectual Property in the Internet era, and related matters.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 306. Jeremiah Harding, interviewed me last night for his Youtube channel Jeremiah Talks, about various bullshit arguments for IP and confused libertarians who call us "commies" for opposing IP socialism. Video coming soon.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 305. I appeared today on the Disenthrall.me Youtube channel, host Patrick Smith, along with Keith Knight. We discussed whether social media bans and censorship is a breach of contract, and related issues. Related material: A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability, Journal of Libertarian Studies 17, no. 2 (Spring 2003): 11-37 The Libertarian View on Fine Print, Shrinkwrap, Clickwrap (May 8, 2009) The “If you own something, that implies that you can sell it; if you sell something, that implies you must own it first” Fallacies, StephanKinsella.com (June 2, 2018) Rothbard on the “Original Sin” in Land Titles: 1969 vs. 1974 (Nov. 5, 2014)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 304. I was a guest on The Liberty Weekly Podcast Ep. 136, with host Patrick MacFarlane (Nov. 1, 2020). From his shownotes: The Great Stephan Kinsella joins me to discuss balancing the practice of law with scholarly pursuits, the future of libertarianism, and his forthcoming book “Law in a Libertarian World.”

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 303. This was my appearance on the Free Thought Project Podcast: How IP Laws are the Antithesis of Liberty & Innovation, from Oct. 31, 2020. From their shownotes: On this week’s episode of the Free Thought Project Podcast, Jason, Johnny, and Matt talk with Libertarian Figurehead, Stephen Kinsella. Stephan Kinsella is an American intellectual property lawyer, a Libertarian writer and speaker, Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom. Kinsella is a leading anti-IP libertarian theorist, author of ‘Against Intellectual Property’ and has had work published in Mises Daily Article, The Journal of Libertarian Studies and the Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics. In the podcast we cover the basics of intellectual property, the misconceptions attached to them and how IP laws are the opposite of innovation. We also talked about Covid-19 vaccines patents, the evolution of meme culture, social media censorship using Copyright and IP laws, Bitcoin’s potential, how future technology will evade government regulations, 3D printing, voting, the 2020 election and if Mr Kinsella is an iPhone or Android user.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 302. [Update: see various biographical pieces on my publications page, including Alan D. Bergman, Adopting Liberty: The Stephan Kinsella Story (2025).] From The Human Action Podcast, Oct. 23, 2020, with Jeff Deist, discussing Hans-Hermann Hoppe's Democracy: The God That Failed, chapters 5-8. Transcript below. From the Mises.org shownotes: Lawyer and libertarian theorist Stephan Kinsella joins the show to discuss the middle chapters of Hoppe's Democracy, The God That Failed—in particular dealing with "desocialization" of collective property, immigration, and free trade. These are the most controversial and widely-discussed parts of the book, and Kinsella provides a fascinating analysis of property vs. wealth, the problems with public ownership and forced integration, and the concept of rule-setting for state property. And don't miss the final part of the show for his explanation of "Hoppephobia." [“Hoppephobia” (Liberty, March 1990)] Kinsella's article on LewRockwell.com: www.lewrockwell.com/2005/09/stephan-kinsella/a-simple-libertarian-argument/ Read Stephan Kinsella's Against Intellectual Property at Mises.org/KinsellaBook Use the code HAPOD for a discount on Democracy: The God That Failed from our bookstore: Mises.org/BuyHoppe Mises Institute original video: Jeff Deist and Stephan Kinsella on Hoppe’s Democracy Transcript 00:00:03 JEFF DEIST: This is Jeff Deist, and you’re listening to the Human Action podcast. Hey, ladies and gentlemen, thanks so much for joining us, and welcome back once again to the Human Action podcast, a show we do every week where we are not afraid of books, even the 900-page books. And that’s really what the show is all about is working our way through what we consider important or seminal works in the broad, let’s say, Austro-libertarian landscape, and then by doing so, hopefully encouraging you to read these books, to tackle these books and also helping you through them as you go. 00:00:38 So that’s the goal, and as you know, we have recently started with Hans-Hoppe’s Democracy: The God That Failed, and we chose this purposely because we had three weeks left until the election, so we’re breaking it up into three sections. And last week we were lucky to be joined by my friend, Jayant Bhandari, and we had a great talk about things like time preference and civilization and capital at the beginning of that book. And in the mid part of this book where Hoppe gets into the discussion of centralization and trade and immigration, I thought there would be nobody better to invite on the show than Stephan Kinsella with whom most of you are already familiar no doubt. 00:01:19 He is a patent attorney. He has written extensively on not just libertarian theory but I would say more narrowly libertarian legal theory, which is a bit of a different animal. And also, of course, he’s perhaps best known for his work on IP, and we will link to at least one article of his, which we shall discuss during the show. We will link to his book, Against Intellectual Property, at the mises.org site. If you haven’t read it, and you – or maybe you don’t have developed thoughts about IP in the digital age, you should read it. You can read it easily over a weekend, and I very much encourage you to do so regardless of where you fall on that debate. I – my personal feelings are in line with Kinsella on that topic, by the way. So all that said, Stephan, thanks for joining. 00:02:08 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Glad to be here, Jeff. 00:02:09 JEFF DEIST: Well, I want to ask you before we get into the book, it came out in 2001. Unfortunately, the Mises Institute doesn’t own this book, wish we did. So where were you? What were you doing in 2001? Where were you living? How did you become aware of Hoppe or this book? 00:02:25 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Oh 2001. That’s a good question. I remember that because that was the year of 9/11. I was back in Houston. I’m from Louisiana. I had moved to Houston as a lawyer in 1992 and moved to Philadelphia in ’94 and been there for a few years and moved back to Houston. And I remember in 2001, I was in my bedroom when the Twin Towers attack happened. 00:02:52 I was already a Hoppeian, Rothbardian, Austrian, anarcho-capitalist libertarian, and my first Hoppian introduction was his argumentation ethics in a Liberty Magazine symposium, which I read in 1988 in law school and – when I was in Louisiana. And so I became enamored of Hans when I read that, and then I read his Theory of Socialism and Capitalism, which is a sort of a systematic treatise laying out his propertarian, Austrian theory, and then of course his subsequent books, his subsequent books which are more or less previously published articles but related by a common theme, so economics and ethics in private property in 1994 if I recall, and then Democracy, the one we’re talking about how, and then The Great Fiction, and who knows what else is to come. [Note: see relate

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 301. This is my appearance on the Tales from the Crypt bitcoin podcast, Episode 195, with host Marty Bent. From his shownotes: Join Marty as he sits down with Stephan Kinsella to discuss: - State's rights - The Lockdowns - The Constitution - The Government v. The State - Bitcoin didn't ask for permission - Are leftists insane? - Should you vote? - Smart contracts - much more

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 300. This is my appearance on Keith Knight’s Youtube show “Don’t Tread on Anyone” (Sept. 17, 2020), discussing a hodge-podge of issues. We talked previously in 2017. Youtube embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 299. https://youtu.be/ULLKItpCiBA This is my appearance on the Law of Liberty Podcast, #7 (Sept. 12, 2020). From their shownotes: "In this episode, we were honored to have a long conversation with Stephan Kinsella! Stephan is a patent attorney and libertarian legal theorist. His website is https://stephankinsella.com/ and you can find him on Twitter @NSKinsella - We suggest for all of our listeners to check out his work! We hit a lot of different topics in this conversation, some new and others which we've talked about in previous episodes. If you like the show, give us a follow @LawOfLibertyPod, @HoffFunk, and @StrattyD The opening music we used is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otD-XbAhMbU"

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 298. This was my appearance on We Are Libertarians, host Chris Spangle, Ep. 457, part of their "Path to Libertarianism" series. From their shownotes: "Chris Spangle speaks to scholar Stephan Kinsella about his path from Objectivism to anarcho-capitalism, why intellectual property laws conflict with property rights, and gives an excellent overview of Austrian Economics."

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 297. This is my appearance on Guy Swann's Bitcoin Audible podcast, Chat#46. From his shownotes: Stephan Kinsella joins us today for a fascinating discussion on the morality and concept of property in the digital age. Is it possible to own Bitcoin? Do we legally own it, or are we simply the ones in control via the rules of the Bitcoin system?

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 296. This is an appearance on Timo Virkkala's LocoFoco Netcast. We had a rambling discussion about libertarianism etc. (see my previous episode with him at KOL291 | LocoFoco–NOT talking about “legal positivism”). https://soundcloud.com/locofoco-net/my-peeps-stephan-kinsella-on-todays-libertarians-1 Update: Youtube version:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 295. This is my appearance on Jimmy Song's podcast Bitcoin Fixes This (ep. 7). Bitcoin Fixes This #7: Intellectual Property Stephan Kinsella is a patent attorney, Austrian economist and author of Against Intellectual Property. We talk about IP law’s monarchist origins and how it’s a tool for monopoly. Stephan also tells us about how information is not the same thing as physical property and how IP and Bitcoin both suffer from labor theories of value.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 294. This is my appearance on the Burning Boots podcast, ep. 53. We had lots of fun. From their shownotes: We have Stephan Kinsella on this week to hang out and joke around then we get into some more thought provoking topics and questions for him from the listener mailbag! He's one of the most prominent Hoppeans around right now and frankly we found him to be a little under-educated for our prestigious intellectual podcast, but hopefully you can forgive him anyway. Follow him, read him, listen to his podcast, and definitely listen to his debates because they usually rock. Before we bring Kinsella on though, we take about 30 minutes to talk about the state of Kenosha and the collapse in general and Davie tells us about how the doctor that cut his balls off might secretly be based. Burning Question for this week: Can property be implicitly abandoned? Outro song this week (chosen by Stephan) is The Eagle Has Landed by Saxon

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 293. This is my discussion with my old friend and colleague, patent lawyer Steve Mendelsohn, about faith and free will and related issues, some of which are discussed in his book Shallow Draughts: Faith in the Absence of Free Will (2017) (PDF of this book and his most recent one posted here [Shallow Draughts] and here [Sequitur] with his permission). (Steve and I worked as patent lawyer associates together from about 1994-96 or so in Schnader Harrison in Philly.) Yes, yes, I know I normally talk only about libertarian legal theory, or, mostly, IP, and try to avoid discoursing about topics I don't think I'm an expert on ... like faith, concept formation, knowledge theory, free will, compatibilism, and the like, but, hey, what the hell. Caveat listener! Related: Shallow Draughts: Faith in the Absence of Free Will (2017; pdf) and Sequitur (2020; pdf) Mendelsohn, Kosher Vestiges Steve Mendelsohn: The God of Death and the Death of God Steve Mendelsohn, Law School Asshole Patent Lawyer Mostly Agrees With Me KOL471 | “What Is Property? And What Is Not? — Part 1," Capitalism & Morality (Vancouver) (see in particular text at note 3: "In society, others’ free will introduces the risk of interference with possession, necessitating property rights to protect it. [Note: I do not mean to imply here there is free will in the causal sense, but it’s too complicated to get into in such a talk, and not necessary either. 3. My friend Steve Mendelsohn, the “law school asshole” mentioned above–he and I have disagreed before on free will. See KOL293 | Faith and Free Will, with Steve Mendelsohn. I have not talked in detail about free will, but have mentioned it here and there: Peikoff on Copyright, Michael Jackson; Memories of Meeting Rothbard in 1994; Remembering Tibor Machan, Libertarian Mentor and Friend: Reflections on a Giant, the section “Free Will/Downward Causation”. Re the current talk, Steve commented to me: “Apparently I listened too long because I got to the part where you imply that free will exists. So sad.” My response: “Basically as I have tried and failed to explain, I’m a dualist and think have different realms of phenomenon to understand and different concepts and terminology appropriate to each—to causal world and the teleological world. If and insofar as we find it useful or indeed unavoidable to understand and characterize our and other humans actions as purposive, that is as action, not mere behavior, aimed at achieving “chosen” or selected ends, then there is no other vocabulary to use than to describe the action as one where we choose our means and ends. But this “choice” is the way we conceive of and describe human action, th way we characterize it in a teleological sense. It does not mean that there is “free will” in the causal sense. But it’s hard to explain which is why I use shorthand. Similar when talking about natural law or natural rights I will sometimes refer to ‘God” as a placeholder concept even though there is no real “God.” It’s just language.] Peikoff on Copyright, Michael Jackson Memories of Meeting Rothbard in 1994 Remembering Tibor Machan, Libertarian Mentor and Friend: Reflections on a Giant, the section "Free Will/Downward Causation" Ayn Rand on Free Will David Kelley lecture on Free Will, Foundations of Knowledge lecture series https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8qeaxNl7jE&list=PLnHOyZsmJrozETJ9zzryDhW0kliZkbIsu&index=5 It is obvious that "genuine free will" in a causal sense is impossible. Randians are diehard monists so try to force it into this monism by some handwaving legerdemain about how the "locus" is on the choice to focus blah blah blah. At least Kelley admits that to have "genuine"… — Stephan Kinsella (@NSKinsella) November 28, 2025 Update: Re the upcoming PFS talk by David Dürr (Switzerland): “On Freedom of the Will,” I had these comments to Hoppe: I am curious to see what he will say. I am also skeptical of free will in the causal sense, since it seems to presuppose downward causation, which seems to me to be as irrational and spooky as quantum action at a distance, which Einstein himself rejected. And yet in the teleological realm there must be choice as it's a component of action. So this is the dilemma. I know there are some libertarian arguments that try show free will is apriori true--by Rand and others, maybe Rothbard--to the effect that you cannot deny free will because it is presupposed in arguments where you are trying to persuade others that free does not exist—since you presuppose they are free to (choose to) change their minds if they agree with your arguments. There is some subtle error in this reasoning, I think. For genuine apriori—necessarily true—truths, they are of the form that the denial is contradictory since the proposition denied is assumed to be true in the attempt to deny it. E.g. we cannot conceive of a world that does not exist, or with

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 292. This was my appearance recently on a Brazilian podcast. I believe they are adding subtitles in Portuguese. For now, here is the audio, and the current version of the youtube video is below. Their shownotes (roughly translated): "Visconde de Mauá Study Group The Libertarian Study Group of Fortaleza, Visconde de Mauá, is pleased to present a lecture with another of the great names of Libertarianism in the world, the Author and lawyer Stephan Kinsella. At this event, we discussed ideas about what it means to be a libertarian and its practical application in everyday life. Kinsella is the author of an extensive work on libertarianism including the works: Estoppel: A New Justification for Individual Rights, New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Theories of Law and What is Libertarianism. which have become essential works for understanding libertarianism, especially in their application in law, these works are extremely relevant!" Youtube below:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 291. This is my interview by (really: discussion with) my old friend and underappreciated stalwart libertarian thinker and writer Timo Virkkala. This is one of the early episodes of his new podcast, LocoFoco, and were were apparently going to talk about legal positivism and perhaps argumentation ethics, but we got detoured onto tangents for almost two hours, about a variety of issues--covid, riding dirt bikes, and so on. Good guy. Very smart. Underappreciated. Check out his new podcast, LocoFoco. https://soundcloud.com/locofoco-net/not-talking-about-legal-positivism-with-stephan-kinsella Update: the raw feed was a video skype, which Timo edited for his podcast. The raw video is posted below, in which you can briefly see my new poodle puppy Bella Kinsella:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 290. This my appearance on the Liberty412 podcast, with host Mike Cuneo. We discussed a variety of topics, from the philosophy of property rights and the problem with IP, to coronavirus, racism, the prospects of liberty and anarchy, activism, and the like. We also detour into other issues like the Fermi Paradox and theories about the Industrial Revolution.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 289. [Update: Transcript appended below] This is my appearance on the Scottish Liberty Podcast from May 30, 2020, with hosts Antony Sammeroff and Tom Laird. We discussed IP and related matters, including Sammeroff's recent debate on the topic of IP with pro-IP Randian law professor Adam Mossoff. See various links, embeds, notes below. This was the second take, and entitled "A Sober Conversation with Stephan Kinsella...," because we had previously recorded a discussion on May 24, 2020, in which I was a bit drunk and went off on a rant. The episode was entitled "Under the Influence... of Stephan Kinsella... Against Intellectual Property". We then recorded this current episode on May 30, 2020. [Update: I recently (March 2021) realized I never posted the initial episode, so have just posted it as KOL326 | Scottish Liberty Podcast: Discussing the Mossoff-Sammeroff IP Debate, Take 1: Under the Influence…] See various links, embeds, notes below. Youtube of the current discussion: Youtube of the initial discussion, now posted at KOL326: Antony's previous debate with Mossoff: In his remarks, Mossoff mentioned this paper by Stephen Haber as supporting the empirical case for patents (funny, I thought the Objectivists had principles): Stephen Haber, "Patents and the Wealth of Nations," 23 Geo. Mason L.Rev. 811 (2016). I have read through it as much as I can stand and provide my critical commentary here: “The Overwhelming Empirical Case Against Patent and Copyright”--see in particular note 3 and accompanying text. ❧ Transcript Scottish Liberty Podcast: Discussing the Mossoff-Sammeroff IP Debate, Take 2: A Sober Conversation With Stephan Kinsella (May 30, 2020) [Transcript of "Scottish Liberty Podcast: Discussing the Mossoff-Sammeroff IP Debate, Take 2: A Sober Conversation (May 30, 2020)] 00:00:01 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: Greetings people of planet Earth. It must be episode 156 of the Scottish Liberty Podcast with me, Antony Sammeroff, and that ranty, ranty man, Tom Laird, back with us again. 00:00:15 TOM LAIRD: Thank you. 00:00:15 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: Sorry. 00:00:16 TOM LAIRD: I’m free. 00:00:17 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: He’s free. The excellent, the extraordinary Stephan Kinsella. Don’t mispronounce it Stephen. Don’t be that guy. Don’t be that guy. Only an idiot would do that. Thank you for joining us. 00:00:33 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Glad to be here with all four of us. You said there was you, Antony Sammeroff, Tom, and me, so that’s four. 00:00:39 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: Excellent. 00:00:41 STEPHAN KINSELLA: I only see three people though. 00:00:43 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: So we’re going to talk about – you only – for those tuning in on Facebook and YouTube see that I kind of look weird because I’m trying this digital background. But Zoom thinks that my face is part of the background, so I look… 00:00:57 STEPHAN KINSELLA: I think you’re triggering a lot of light-epilepsy people right now. 00:01:00 TOM LAIRD: I think it’s because your head looks like a planetoid. 00:01:02 00:01:04 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: I am the moon, the orbits, the Earth. 00:01:07 STEPHAN KINSELLA: He looks like a Marvel character like Ego the Living Planet or something. 00:01:12 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: So I guess we’re going to talk about IP and stuff like that. 00:01:17 TOM LAIRD: Whoa. 00:01:17 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: That’s crazy. As some people know, probably heard a couple of weeks ago, I was debating this Adam Mossoff guy. And there may have been some conversation that we had once before, but we don’t talk about that anymore because… 00:01:32 TOM LAIRD: Did he laugh at any point during the… 00:01:34 00:01:37 ANTONY SAMMEROFF: But let’s just say that there were some things that could have been said in that discussion that we never speak of – we don’t talk about anymore that weren’t discussed. So I guess a good place to start would be what – you said one of the things annoying about Adam Mossoff is he never actually defines IP. So what – how would you – how do you define IP? 00:02:02 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Well, so this is – all right, the definition is intellectual property refers to a set of legal rights that – it’s like an umbrella term that covers four or five different types of statutory – mostly statutory rights, which are all not really related. So it basically just is a term that people came up with to lump together some different types of law like the patent system, which covers inventions, and the copyright system, which covers artistic and creative works, and then the trademark system, which covers sources of goods and names, brand names, things like that, and then the trade secret system, which has some rights related to keeping secrets that you want your employees not to tell other people, things like that, and then maybe one or two other special things in modern times. 00:02:57 So they’re always – in a way they’re loosely related, and the reason the term bothers me is because it’s a propaganda term. It was

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 288. Installment #2 in my impromptu Zoom session with whoever wanted to join. Got a bit more hang of how to record everyone in gallery mode, and so on. As last time, just a few of us talking random libertarian topics. Next time will give more advance notice and maybe have a slightly bigger audience.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 287. I decided to try an impromptu Zoom session with whoever wanted to join, in part to test Zoom and my tech skillz. Just a few of us talking random libertarian topics. No big whoop. May make this a more regular thing once I get the hang of it.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 286. This is my umpteenth appearance on The Tom Woods Show, "Ep. 1629 Kinsella on the Coronavirus, His Road to Libertarianism, and the Good and Bad in Ayn Rand". From Tom's show notes: Libertarian legal theorist Stephan Kinsella and I discuss his road to libertarianism (of the Rothbardian kind), where he thinks we need more work, the rights and wrongs of Ayn Rand, and more. And yes, some discussion of the virus…. Related links: How I Became A Libertarian The Superiority of the Roman Law: Scarcity, Property, Locke and Libertarianism The Greatest Libertarian Books Hans-Hermann Hoppe on Anarcho-Capitalism Kinsella et al., International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution (Oxford, 2020) KOL197 | Tom Woods Show: The Central Rothbard Contribution I Overlooked, and Why It Matters (contract theory) The Genesis of Estoppel: My Libertarian Rights Theory New Publisher, Co-Editor for my Legal Treatise, and how I got started with legal publishing.