Kinsella On Liberty

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 184. Last month I attended PorcFest 2015 and delivered this talk on intellectual property. Video version below (followed by a lower quality version shot by James Cox). GROK SHOWNOTES: In this provocative lecture delivered at PorcFest 2015, titled “Intellectual Property is the Root of All Evil,” libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella argues that intellectual property (IP) laws, specifically patents and copyrights, are fundamentally anti-libertarian, creating artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas and violating natural property rights (0:00-10:00). Kinsella, leveraging Austrian economics, explains that property rights apply only to scarce, rivalrous resources to resolve conflicts, using examples like a patented mousetrap to show how IP restricts individuals from using their own property (10:01-25:00). He critiques IP’s historical roots in state monopolies, such as the 1623 Statute of Monopolies and 1710 Statute of Anne, and its practical harms, like stifling innovation and raising costs in industries such as pharmaceuticals (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s bold claim frames IP as a root cause of economic and cultural distortions, undermining the free market’s ability to foster prosperity. Kinsella debunks common pro-IP arguments, including the utilitarian notion that IP incentivizes innovation and the labor-based claim that creators deserve monopolies, citing IP-free markets like open-source software as evidence of robust competition-driven innovation (40:01-55:00). He explores IP’s broader impacts, such as copyrights limiting artistic expression and patents creating barriers in technology, and discusses alternatives like trade secrets and market incentives (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on transitioning to an IP-free world, the role of global IP treaties, and moral objections to IP, reinforcing his call for abolition to enable a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by urging libertarians to reject IP as a state-enforced evil, advocating for intellectual freedom to drive economic and cultural flourishing (1:25:01-1:25:43). This lecture is a fiery and accessible critique, perfect for those exploring libertarian arguments against IP. Transcript and Grok Detailed Summary below I also participated in a debate on anarchy and participated in a couple of radio shows (Ernie Hancock’s Freedom Phoenix and Free Talk Live). James Cox shot some other videos as well, which are up on his channel; a few of these are also embedded below. Porcfest 2015: The Root of All Evil (official PorcFest version) Lecture: Intellectual Property is the Root of All Evil: Porcfest 2015 (James Cox version) Grok Detailed Summary Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s KOL184 podcast, recorded at PorcFest 2015 in June 2015, is a lecture titled “Intellectual Property is the Root of All Evil.” As a libertarian patent attorney, Kinsella argues that IP laws—patents and copyrights—are state-enforced monopolies that violate property rights, stifle innovation, and distort markets and culture. Rooted in Austrian economics, the 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, critiques IP’s philosophical, historical, and practical flaws, advocating for its abolition to enable a free market of ideas. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for approximately 5-15 minute blocks, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and IP’s Illegitimacy (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces the lecture, framing IP as a state-enforced evil that contradicts libertarian principles. Property Rights and Scarcity (10:01-25:00): Argues property rights apply to scarce resources, not ideas, showing IP’s violation of natural rights. Historical Roots and Economic Harms (25:01-40:00): Traces IP to state monopolies and details its economic costs, like pharmaceutical pricing. Critique of Pro-IP Arguments (40:01-55:00): Debunks utilitarian and labor-based IP justifications, citing IP-free innovation. Cultural Impacts and Alternatives (55:01-1:10:00): Explores IP’s cultural restrictions and market alternatives like trade secrets. Q&A: Abolition and Objections (1:10:01-1:25:00): Addresses IP abolition logistics, global treaties, and moral issues, reinforcing anti-IP stance. Conclusion (1:25:01-1:25:43): Urges rejection of IP as a root evil, advocating for intellectual freedom and market prosperity. Block-by-Block Summaries 0:00-5:00 (Introduction) Description: Kinsella opens at PorcFest 2015, introducing his lecture “Intellectual Property is the Root of All Evil” and his role as a libertarian patent attorney opposing IP (0:00-2:30). He outlines the lecture’s goal to expose IP’s philosophical and practical flaws, promising a Q&A to engage the audience (2:31-5:00). Summary: The block sets a provocative tone, framing IP as a state-enforced evil to be criti

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 183. I recently attended PorcFest 2015 and participated in a debate on anarchy and other matters, plus a speech on IP as the Root of All Evil. The YouTube, filmed by James Cox, is below. The audio here was captured by my iphone. Update: From Ayn Rand in the Campground: The Atlas Society at PorcFest "During a highlight of the conference -- people had been anticipating it for weeks -- William Thomas debated Rand’s principle of minimal government with anarchist Stephen Kinsella to a packed and lively audience. The tent was full, with standing room only, and people were still spilling out of the tent. Everyone listened with rapt attention, cheered their favorite points, and hung around for hours afterward to talk and debate ideas. (See the video, here: https://goo.gl/snjmXE) Lecture: Intellectual Property is the Root of All Evil: Porcfest 2015 Also: Appeared as a guest on Ernie Hancock's Freedom's Phoenix episode for 6/26/15 (in Hour 2). We discussed IP-related aspects of bitcoin, MaidSAFE, etc.). Appeared as a guest of Mark Edge on Free Talk Live, June 26, 2015 (starts at 40:28) (video is here) Other (mostly fun, social): Stephan Kinsella Meets Ernie Hancock at Porcfest 2015 Stephan Kinsella Meets Adam Kokesh at Porcfest 2015 Stephan Kinsella Meets Derrick J Host Of Flaming Freedom at Porcfest 2015 Larken Rose, Stephan Kinsella and Daniel Rothschild Anarchy at The Rock (PorcFest 2015) This is an impromptu video shot by James Cox of some discussions with Larken Rose who was sitting under his "rock" for several days. Stephan Kinsella Chalks Porcfest 2015 K-Man Style Porcfest 2015 Talk Stephan Kinsella, Ganine Van Alst, Daniel Rothschild, Evan Isaac, Eliza Sprague Friday, June 26 • 10:30am - 11:20am Anarchism, for and against: a debate Sign up or log in to save this event to your list and see who's attending! TweetShare Does a commitment to liberty imply a commitment to anarchy, or the total elimination of government? Is a stable, anarchic system of liberty possible or desirable? David Kelley will moderate a debate on these issues between Stephan Kinsella Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom and William Thomas of The Atlas Society. Moderators David Kelley Chief Intellectual Officer, The Atlas Society David Kelley is the founder and Chief Intellectual Officer of The Atlas Society. After earning a Ph.D. in philosophy from Princeton University in 1975, he joined the philosophy department of Vassar College, where he remained until 1984. He has also taught at Brandeis University as a Visiting Lecturer. Among his books are Unrugged Individualism: The Selfish Basis of Benevolence; The Contested Legacy of Ayn Rand; The Evidence of the Senses, a... Read More → Speakers Stephan Kinsella Executive Editor, Libertarian Papers Stephan Kinsella is a practicing patent attorney and a libertarian writer and speaker. He Founder and Executive Editor of Libertarian Papers, Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom (C4SIF). A former adjunct professor at South Texas College of Law, he has published numerous articles and books on IP law, international law, and the application of libertarian principles to legal topics, including Against Intellectual Property... Read More → William Thomas Director of Programs, The Atlas Society - The Center for Objectivism William R Thomas is Director of Programs at The Atlas Society. He has a Master's Degree in Economics from the University of Michigan, and has served as Lecturer in Economics there and at the University at Albany. He has been a lecturer at Gadjah Mada University in Indonesia and conducted research under the auspices of the People's University of China. He is a graduate of Oberlin College, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. Thomas is the... Read More → Friday June 26, 2015 10:30am - 11:20am ATLAS SOCIETY TENT Philosophy Attendees (41) Attendance numbers do not account for private attendees. Get there early!

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 182. In January 2014, Stefan Molyneux (of FreeDomain Radio) and I had a discussion with Harrison Fischberg about the foundation of libertarian ethics. I just realized that I never put this on my podcast feed so—here it is.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 181. I discussed argumentation ethics with Tom Woods on his show today: Ep. 370 It Is Impossible to Argue Against Libertarianism Without Contradiction By Tom Woods / March 31, 2015 / Podcast Stephan Kinsella discusses the argumentation ethics of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, who argues that only libertarian norms can be argumentatively. READ MORE Tom cleverly chose as the title for the episode a provocative one reminiscent of the bold title of Hoppe's Liberty article, "The Ultimate Justification of the Private Property Ethic" (September 1988). See also Tom Woods on the Origin of Rights and Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethic I've discussed it several times in the past in audio and text. See, e.g.: Kinsella, “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide,” Mises Daily (May 27, 2011) Kinsella, "A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights," "Dialogical Arguments for Libertarian Rights," and “Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan,” all in Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston, Texas: Papinian Press, 2023) "Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethics and Its Critics" "Revisiting Argumentation Ethics"; KOL155 | “The Social Theory of Hoppe: Lecture 3: Libertarian Rights and Argumentation Ethics” “Argumentation Ethics, Estoppel, and Libertarian Rights: Adam Smith Forum, Moscow” “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society: Lecture 1: Libertarian Basics: Rights and Law” “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society: Lecture 2: Libertarian Basics: Rights and Law-Continued” “Argumentation Ethics and the Philosophy of Freedom,” by Frank van Dun "Argumentation Ethics" (Wikipedia) The A priori of Argumention, video introduction by Hoppe Update: response by Bob Murphy here: Stephan Kinsella Discusses Argumentation Ethics With Tom Woods. For more: see Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan, Anti-state.com (Sept. 19, 2002) (wayback version) (reply to Bob Murphy and Gene Callahan, Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethic: A Critique, Anti-state.com (Sept. 19, 2002; wayback version; more recent version at JLS; Block’s rejoinder); debate discussed in this forum).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 180. Jeff Tucker and I discussed IP and my original Against Intellectual Property article. The video can be seen here, and it's embedded below: Spreecast is the social video platform that connects people. Check out Liberty Classics: Against IP on Spreecast.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 179. Jeff Tucker and I discuss the recent copyright lawsuit over the "Blurred Lines" song by Robin Thicke and Pharrel. Background and related: From this post: "In the case of copyright, for example, J.D. Salinger, author of Catcher in the Rye, convinced U.S. courts to ban the publication of a novel called 60 Years Later: Coming Through the Rye.” And in Canada, when a grocery store in Canada mistakenly sold 14 copies of a new Harry Potter book a few days before its official release, a judge “ordered customers not to talk about the book, copy it, sell it or even read it before it is officially released at 12:01 a.m. July 16″ (on both cases, see Atlas Hefts: The Sequel!)." See also: The Patent, Copyright, Trademark, and Trade Secret Horror Files ‘Blurred Lines’ Jury Orders Pharrell, Robin Thicke to Pay $7.3 Million to Marvin Gaye Family 'Blurred Lines' verdict a blow to creative expression Did Robin Thicke steal ‘Blurred Lines’ from Marvin Gaye? GREAT, NOW “BLURRED LINES” HAS RUINED THE ENTIRE MUSIC INDUSTRY A Better Silence - John Cage and copyright Silent music dispute resolved Bob Dylan Makes the Case Against Today's Copyright Climate Six songs, same tune? Mashup shows country's similarities Tom Petty on Sam Smith Settlement: 'No Hard Feelings. These Things Happen'

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 178. I appeared on Emancipated Humans, with host Luis Fernando Mises (Feb. 24, 2015 episode). Related Writing “Corporate Personhood, Limited Liability, and Double Taxation” “In Defense of the Corporation” “Legitimizing the Corporation” “Causation and Aggression” (with Patrick Tinsley) See also: KOL170: Tom Woods Show: Are Corporations Unlibertarian? KOL115 | Mises Canada Austrian AV Club—Kinsella and the Corporation on Trial (2012) KOL100 | The Role of the Corporation and Limited Liability In a Free Society (PFS 2013) KOL 026 | FreeDomain Radio with Stefan Molyneux discussing Corporations and Limited Liability Left-Libertarianism on Corporations and Limited Liability Rothbard on Corporations and Limited Liability for Tort Comment on Knapp’s Big Government, Big Business — Conjoined Twins PILON ON CORPORATIONS: A DISCUSSION WITH KEVIN CARSON THIS REMINDS ME OF SOME LEFT-LIBERTARIAN CRITICISMS OF “BIG BUSINESS” Defending Corporations: Block and Huebert Run! Run! It’s a Business in a Box! Legitimizing the Corporation and Other Posts

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 177. This is the final of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011). The first lecture may be found in KOL172. GROK SUMMARY: In the sixth and final lecture of the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella concludes his comprehensive critique of intellectual property (IP), focusing on the economic consequences of patents and copyrights and exploring reform possibilities from a libertarian perspective (0:00-10:00). Kinsella recaps the course’s arguments, emphasizing that IP creates artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas, violating property rights and distorting markets, and uses examples like pharmaceutical patents to illustrate how IP raises costs and limits access (10:01-25:00). He critiques the economic rationale for IP, citing studies that show minimal innovation benefits and significant costs, such as litigation and barriers to competition, and argues that IP-free markets, like open-source software, demonstrate robust innovation through competition and first-mover advantages (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s lecture, grounded in Austrian economics, frames IP as a statist intervention that impoverishes society. Kinsella explores reform options, from outright abolition to incremental changes like shortening patent terms, but argues that abolition is the only consistent libertarian position, as partial reforms perpetuate IP’s core flaws (40:01-55:00). He addresses IP’s cultural and social impacts, such as copyrights stifling artistic creativity, and discusses alternatives like trade secrets and market incentives, citing examples like J.K. Rowling’s success without needing IP (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella responds to audience questions on transitioning to an IP-free world, the role of global treaties, and IP’s moral justifications, reinforcing his call for a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by summarizing the course’s case against IP, urging listeners to reject it as a violation of liberty and embrace intellectual freedom for economic and cultural prosperity (1:25:01-1:26:07). This lecture is a powerful conclusion, blending economic analysis and libertarian principles for those challenging IP’s legitimacy. Youtube, slides, transcript, and Grok detailed summary for the this lecture are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail at KOL172. The “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172. Lecture 6: THE FUTURE; INTEGRATING IP THEORY WITH AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS AND LIBERTARIAN THEORY; PROPOSED REFORMS; IMAGINING A POST-IP WORLD; THE FUTURE OF OPEN VS. CLOSED GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s sixth lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," delivered in 2011, concludes with a focus on the economic consequences of intellectual property (IP) and reform possibilities. As a libertarian patent attorney, Kinsella argues that patents and copyrights impose artificial scarcity, violate property rights, and harm innovation, advocating for their abolition. The 86-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, synthesizes the course’s historical, theoretical, and legal critiques, using Austrian economics to propose a free market of ideas. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for approximately 5-15 minute blocks, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Course Recap (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces Lecture 6, recapping the course and focusing on IP’s economic impacts and reform. Economic Consequences of IP (10:01-25:00): Critiques IP’s economic distortions, like high costs and limited access, using pharmaceutical examples. Empirical Evidence and Market Alternatives (25:01-40:00): Cites studies showing IP’s minimal innovation benefits and highlights IP-free markets’ success. Reform Options and Libertarian Stance (40:01-55:00): Explores IP reform, arguing abolition is the only consistent libertarian solution. Cultural Impacts and Alternatives (55:01-1:10:00): Discusses IP’s cultural harms and alternatives like trade secrets and market incentives. Q&A: Transition and Moral Issues (1:10:01-1:25:00): Addresses IP abolition logistics, global treaties, and moral arguments, reinforcing anti-IP stance. Conclusion and Course Summary (1:25:01-1:26:07): Summarizes the case against IP, urging its rejection for intellectual and economic freedom. Block-by-Block Summaries 0:00-5:00 (Introduction) Description: Kinsella opens Lecture 6, welcoming students to the final Mises Academy session and recapping the course’s focus on IP’

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 176. This is the fifth of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011). The first lecture may be found in KOL172. GROK SHOWNOTES: In the fifth and final lecture of the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella examines rights-based arguments for intellectual property (IP), particularly patents and copyrights, arguing they fundamentally conflict with libertarian property rights by imposing artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas (0:00-10:00). Kinsella recaps the course’s prior lectures, emphasizing that property rights apply only to scarce, rivalrous resources to resolve conflicts, and critiques rights-based justifications—natural rights, labor/desert, and creation-based claims—using examples like a patented mousetrap to show how IP restricts owners’ use of their physical property (10:01-25:00). He argues that IP is a state-enforced monopoly that redistributes property rights, stifling innovation and competition, and contrasts this with the free market’s reliance on emulation and knowledge sharing (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s lecture, rooted in Austrian economics, frames IP as a philosophical and practical violation of liberty. Kinsella further debunks the notion that creators have a natural right to their ideas, using a marble statue example to clarify that property stems from first use, not labor or creation, and explores IP’s practical harms, such as high litigation costs and barriers in pharmaceuticals and software (40:01-55:00). He discusses alternatives like trade secrets and market incentives, citing open-source software as evidence of innovation without IP, and critiques IP’s cultural distortions, like limiting artistic remixing (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on contractual IP alternatives, moral objections, and strategies for IP abolition, reinforcing his call for a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by summarizing the course’s case against IP, urging listeners to reject it as a statist intervention and embrace intellectual freedom for prosperity (1:25:01-1:25:33). This lecture is a compelling capstone, blending theory and practical insights for those challenging IP’s legitimacy. Youtube and slides for this lecture are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail at KOL172. The “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172. Transcript and Grok detailed shownotes below. Lecture 5: PROPERTY, SCARCITY, AND IDEAS; EXAMINING RIGHTS-BASED ARGUMENTS FOR IP GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s fifth lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" focuses on rights-based arguments for intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents and copyrights violate libertarian property rights by creating artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas. Rooted in Austrian economics, Kinsella critiques natural rights, labor/desert, and creation-based justifications, advocating for IP abolition. The 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, concludes the course with a theoretical and practical case against IP. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for approximately 5-15 minute blocks, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Course Recap (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces Lecture 5, recapping the course and focusing on rights-based IP arguments. Property Rights and Scarcity (10:01-25:00): Argues property rights apply to scarce resources, not ideas, showing IP’s conflict with libertarianism. Critique of Rights-Based Arguments (25:01-40:00): Debunks natural rights, labor, and creation arguments, highlighting IP’s monopolistic nature. Creation and Ownership Flaws (40:01-55:00): Rejects creation-based ownership, detailing IP’s practical harms in key industries. Alternatives and Cultural Impacts (55:01-1:10:00): Discusses trade secrets, market incentives, and IP’s cultural distortions, citing IP-free innovation. Q&A: Alternatives and Strategies (1:10:01-1:25:00): Addresses contractual IP, moral objections, and abolition strategies, reinforcing anti-IP stance. Conclusion and Course Summary (1:25:01-1:25:33): Summarizes the case against IP, urging its rejection for intellectual freedom. Block-by-Block Summaries 0:00-5:00 (Introduction) Description: Kinsella opens Lecture 5, welcoming students to the final Mises Academy course session and recapping prior lectures on IP’s history, justifications, theory, and statutes (0:00-2:30). He outlines the focus on rights-based arguments for IP, emphasizing his

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 175. This is the fourth of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011). The first lecture may be found in KOL172. GROK SHOWNOTES: In the fourth lecture of the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella provides a detailed examination of the statutes, case law, and international treaties that govern intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets are state-enforced monopolies incompatible with libertarian property rights (0:00-10:00). Kinsella traces the evolution of U.S. IP laws, such as the Patent Act of 1790 and Copyright Act of 1790, to their English predecessors like the 1623 Statute of Monopolies and 1710 Statute of Anne, critiquing their origins in royal privileges and their role in restricting market competition (10:01-25:00). He outlines the legal mechanics of IP, including patent and copyright durations, infringement processes, and remedies like injunctions, emphasizing their economic distortions and anti-competitive effects (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s analysis positions IP as a statist intervention that undermines the free market’s ability to foster innovation. Kinsella explores international IP treaties, such as the 1883 Paris Convention and 1886 Berne Convention, which standardize IP protections globally but entrench corporate monopolies, particularly in pharmaceuticals and technology (40:01-55:00). He critiques IP’s practical harms, including high litigation costs, barriers to innovation, and cultural restrictions, contrasting these with IP-free industries like open-source software that thrive on competition (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on abolishing IP, the role of trade secrets, and IP’s impact on global trade, reinforcing his argument that IP is a net harm to society and should be abolished to promote a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by previewing the final lecture on IP’s economic effects and reform possibilities, urging listeners to reject IP as a violation of libertarian principles (1:25:01-1:25:47). This lecture is a thorough legal critique, ideal for understanding IP’s statutory and global frameworks from a libertarian perspective. Transcript below. Youtube and slides for this lecture are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail at KOL172. The “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172. Lecture 4: IP STATUTES AND TREATIES; OVERVIEW OF JUSTIFICTIONS FOR IP; PROPERTY, SCARCITY AND IDEAS; RIGHTS-BASED ARGUMENTS FOR IP: CREATION AS A SOURCE OF RIGHTS GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s fourth lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" focuses on the statutes, case law, and international treaties governing intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets are state-enforced monopolies that violate libertarian property rights. Rooted in Austrian economics, Kinsella critiques IP’s legal frameworks and their economic and cultural harms, advocating for its abolition. The 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, builds on prior lectures with a legal focus. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Lecture Overview (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces Lecture 4, focusing on IP statutes, case law, and treaties, linking to prior lectures. U.S. IP Statutes and Origins (10:01-25:00): Details U.S. patent and copyright laws, tracing their roots to English monopolies and critiquing their statist nature. IP Legal Mechanics and Effects (25:01-40:00): Explains patent and copyright processes, infringement, and remedies, highlighting their anti-competitive impact. International IP Treaties (40:01-55:00): Examines global treaties like the Paris and Berne Conventions, critiquing their corporate bias. Economic and Cultural Harms (55:01-1:10:00): Critiques IP’s costs, like litigation, and contrasts with IP-free innovation in software and fashion. Q&A: Abolition and Alternatives (1:10:01-1:25:00): Addresses IP abolition, trade secrets, and global trade, reinforcing anti-IP arguments. Conclusion and Preview (1:25:01-1:25:47): Summarizes IP’s legal flaws and previews the final lecture on economics and reform. Block-by-Block Summaries 0:00-5:00 (Introduction) Description: Kinsella opens Lecture 4, welcoming students to the Mises Academy course and recapping prior lectures on IP’s history, justifications, and theo

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 174. This is the third of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011). The first lecture may be found in KOL172. GROK SHOWNOTES: In the third lecture of the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella focuses on the theoretical objections to intellectual property (IP), particularly patents and copyrights, arguing they fundamentally conflict with libertarian property rights and free-market principles (0:00-10:00). Kinsella builds on Lectures 1 and 2 by reiterating that property rights apply only to scarce, rivalrous resources, not non-scarce ideas, using examples like a patented mousetrap to illustrate how IP restricts owners’ use of their physical property (10:01-25:00). He critiques key pro-IP arguments—utilitarian, natural rights, and labor-based—asserting they misapply property concepts to ideas, creating artificial monopolies that stifle innovation and competition (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s libertarian framework, grounded in Austrian economics, emphasizes that IP is a state-imposed violation of natural rights, redistributing property from original owners to IP holders. Kinsella further explores the philosophical flaws of IP, debunking the notion that creation or labor justifies ownership of ideas, using a marble statue example to show that property rights stem from first use, not creative effort (40:01-55:00). He addresses the practical harms of IP, such as high litigation costs and barriers to innovation, particularly in pharmaceuticals and software, and contrasts these with IP-free industries like open-source software that thrive on competition (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella responds to audience questions on topics like contractual alternatives to IP, the role of trade secrets, and IP’s cultural impacts, reinforcing his call for abolition to foster a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by previewing the remaining lectures on IP’s economic and reform issues, urging listeners to reject IP as a statist distortion that impoverishes society (1:25:01-1:25:26). This lecture is a compelling theoretical critique, ideal for those seeking a libertarian perspective on IP’s philosophical underpinnings. Youtube, slides, transcript, and Grok Detailed Summary for this lecture are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail at KOL172. The “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172. Transcript below. Lecture 3: EXAMINING THE UTILITARIAN CASE FOR IP GROK DETAILED SHOWNOTES Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s third lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" dives into the theoretical objections to intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents and copyrights violate libertarian property rights by imposing artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas. Rooted in Austrian economics, Kinsella critiques pro-IP arguments and their practical harms, advocating for IP abolition. The 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, builds on Lectures 1 (history) and 2 (justifications) with a focus on theory. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Lecture Context (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces Lecture 3, focusing on theoretical objections to IP, linking to prior lectures. Property Rights and Scarcity (10:01-25:00): Argues that property rights apply to scarce resources, not ideas, showing IP’s conflict with libertarianism. Critique of Pro-IP Arguments (25:01-40:00): Debunks utilitarian, natural rights, and labor arguments, highlighting IP’s artificial scarcity. Philosophical Flaws of IP (40:01-55:00): Rejects creation-based ownership, using examples to clarify property’s basis in first use. Practical Harms and Alternatives (55:01-1:10:00): Details IP’s costs in pharmaceuticals and software, contrasting with IP-free innovation. Q&A: Alternatives and Impacts (1:10:01-1:25:00): Addresses contractual IP, trade secrets, and cultural effects, reinforcing abolition. Conclusion and Preview (1:25:01-1:25:26): Summarizes theoretical objections and previews economic and reform discussions. Block-by-Block Summaries 0:00-5:00 (Introduction) Description: Kinsella opens Lecture 3, welcoming students to the Mises Academy course and recapping Lectures 1 (IP history and law) and 2 (justifications and types) (0:00-2:30). He outlines the focus on theoretical objections to IP, emphasizing his libertarian anti-IP stance (2:31-5:00). Summary: The block sets the context, linking to prior lectures a

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 173. This is the second of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011). The first lecture may be found in KOL172. GROK SHOWNOTES: In this second lecture of the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella delves into the sources, justifications, and types of intellectual property (IP), building on the historical and legal foundations covered in Lecture 1 (0:00-10:00). Kinsella outlines the main justifications for IP—utilitarian, labor/desert, personality, and natural rights—critiquing each through a libertarian lens rooted in Austrian economics, arguing that IP creates artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas, violating property rights (10:01-25:00). He uses examples like a cake recipe to illustrate that knowledge guides action without needing ownership and examines the legal distinctions between patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets, emphasizing their reliance on state enforcement (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s analysis frames IP as a statist intervention that distorts markets and stifles innovation. Kinsella further critiques the utilitarian claim that IP incentivizes innovation, citing empirical studies showing minimal benefits and significant costs, such as litigation and barriers to competition (40:01-55:00). He explores alternative justifications, like the labor theory of property, debunking the idea that creators inherently own their ideas, and discusses practical implications, such as IP’s role in pharmaceuticals and software (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on topics like the feasibility of contractual IP alternatives, the moral arguments for IP, and its cultural impacts, reinforcing his call for IP abolition to foster a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by previewing future lectures on IP theory and economics, urging listeners to reject IP as a violation of libertarian principles (1:25:01-1:25:47). This lecture is a rigorous theoretical critique, ideal for those exploring the philosophical underpinnings of IP from a libertarian perspective. Youtube and slides for this lecture are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail at KOL172. The “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172. Transcript and Grok Detailed Summary below. Lecture 2: OVERVIEW OF JUSTIFICATIONS FOR IP; PROPERTY, SCARCITY, AND IDEAS GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s second lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" examines the sources, justifications, and types of intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents, copyrights, and other IP forms are incompatible with libertarian property rights. Rooted in Austrian economics, Kinsella critiques IP’s philosophical foundations and practical harms, advocating for its abolition. The 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, builds on Lecture 1’s historical focus with a deep dive into theory. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Lecture Overview (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces Lecture 2, focusing on IP’s sources, justifications, and types, linking to Lecture 1. IP Justifications: Utilitarian and Labor (10:01-25:00): Critiques utilitarian and labor/desert arguments for IP, arguing they misapply to non-scarce ideas. IP Types and Legal Mechanics (25:01-40:00): Examines patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets, highlighting their state-enforced nature. Utilitarian Critique and Evidence (40:01-55:00): Debunks IP’s innovation benefits, citing studies showing high costs and minimal gains. Alternative Justifications and Impacts (55:01-1:10:00): Rejects personality and natural rights arguments, discussing IP’s practical harms in key industries. Q&A: Alternatives and Morality (1:10:01-1:25:00): Addresses contractual IP, moral arguments, and cultural impacts, reinforcing anti-IP stance. Conclusion and Preview (1:25:01-1:25:47): Summarizes the lecture and previews future topics, urging IP rejection. Block-by-Block Summaries 0:00-5:00 (Introduction) Description: Kinsella opens Lecture 2, welcoming students to the Mises Academy course and recapping Lecture 1’s focus on IP’s history and law (0:00-2:30). He outlines the lecture’s goals: to explore IP’s sources, justifications (utilitarian, labor, personality, natural rights), and types (patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets) (2:31-5:00). Summary: The block sets the stage, linking to the previous lecture and

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 172. This is the first of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (Tuesdays, Mar. 22–April 26, 2011), which was a reprise of a similar Mises Academy course in October 2010. The slides and video for this lecture, as well as the “suggested readings” for all six lectures of the course are provided below. The other five lectures follow in subsequent podcast episodes KOL173–177. (Discussed in Rethinking IP; and on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course. See also “Rethinking IP,” Mises Daily (Feb. 10, 2011).) From one student of the first series: Talk very soon and thank you so very much for all the excellent work - very few classes have really changed my life dramatically, actually only 3 have, and all 3 were classes I took at the Mises Academy, starting with PP350... Keep up the good work, See also my article "Rethinking IP," Mises Daily (Feb. 10, 2011). GROK SHOWNOTES: In this first lecture of a five-part Mises Academy course from 2011, titled “Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics,” libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella provides a comprehensive overview of the historical and legal foundations of intellectual property (IP), focusing on patents and copyrights, while setting the stage for his libertarian critique (0:00-10:00). Kinsella begins by introducing the course structure and his anti-IP stance, rooted in Austrian economics, and traces the origins of patents to medieval European monopolies, such as the 1474 Venetian Patent Act, and copyrights to censorship-driven printing privileges in England, culminating in the 1710 Statute of Anne (10:01-25:00). He explains the legal mechanics of IP, including patent and copyright durations, infringement processes, and their economic implications, emphasizing their role as state-granted monopolies that restrict competition (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s historical analysis frames IP as a product of statism, not market principles, laying the groundwork for his argument that IP violates property rights. Kinsella delves into specific historical examples, such as the U.S. Constitution’s IP clause and early patent cases, to illustrate how IP laws evolved to favor corporate interests and entrench monopolistic privileges (40:01-55:00). He critiques the utilitarian justification for IP, noting that empirical evidence, like studies showing minimal innovation benefits, undermines claims that patents and copyrights are necessary for progress (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on topics like the differences between patents, copyrights, and trademarks, the role of IP in pharmaceuticals, and libertarian alternatives to IP, reinforcing his view that a free market thrives without such restrictions (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by previewing the course’s upcoming lectures on IP theory and economics, urging listeners to question the legitimacy of IP as a state-imposed barrier to innovation (1:25:01-1:25:38). This lecture is a thorough introduction to IP’s historical and legal roots, ideal for those seeking a libertarian perspective on the subject. Transcript and detailed Grok summary below. Related Material Youtube playlist for all 6 lectures This course was discussed in “Rethinking IP,” Mises Daily (Feb. 10, 2011), and on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail here. This course followed an earlier presentation in 2010; see "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," Mises Daily (Oct. 22, 2010; archived comments), and "Understanding IP: An Interview with Stephan Kinsella," Mises Daily (Oct. 21, 2010, with Jeffrey A. Tucker) (Transcript of Understanding IP: An Interview with Stephan Kinsella (2010)). Lecture 1 from the 2010 course is here. Introductory video from the Mises Blog post Kinsella Can Be Your Professor: Lecture 1: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN HISTORY GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s first lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course “Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics” explores the historical and legal foundations of intellectual property (IP), particularly patents and copyrights, from a libertarian perspective. As a patent attorney, Kinsella critiques IP as a state-enforced monopoly that contradicts free-market principles, setting the stage for a five-part course. The 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, combines detailed historical analysis with legal insights to argue for IP’s abolition. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block, b

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 171. I was a guest yesterday (Feb. 6, 2015) on Albert Lu's "The Economy" podcast, discussing my recent appearance on Stossel [Stossel Show on Intellectual Property (Fox Business Channel, Jan. 30, 2015)]. The full episode is here; the portion including only our interview is included in this podcast feed. Transcript and grok shownotes below. GROK SHOWNOTES Show Notes: KOL171 | The Albert Lu Podcast: Discussing Stossel and Intellectual Property with Stephan Kinsella Introduction to Intellectual Property Debate [0:00–1:00] Albert Lu introduces the topic of intellectual property (IP) by referencing a recent episode of The John Stossel Show that explored the concept. He highlights how America grants creators exclusive rights to their works—such as songs, books, and movies—to encourage innovation, but notes the controversial nature of IP, as illustrated by Stossel’s comment about YouTube viewership being akin to “stealing.” Lu introduces his guest, Stephan Kinsella, a patent attorney and libertarian writer who appeared on Stossel’s show to discuss IP from a libertarian perspective. Kinsella expresses his enthusiasm for the mainstream platform addressing this issue, noting Stossel’s open-minded approach despite his leanings toward supporting some form of IP. Overview of Stossel’s Show and IP Arguments [1:00–4:13] Lu and Kinsella discuss the structure of the Stossel episode, which included a debate between a pro-IP attorney and an anti-IP advocate, David Koepsell, recommended by Kinsella himself. The show examined six industries—magic tricks, music, fashion, TV, literature, and comedy—highlighting that three are protected by IP laws while three are not, yet all exhibit significant innovation. Kinsella praises the show for its balanced approach and libertarian perspective, a rarity in mainstream media. He notes that different producers handled various segments, and the inclusion of guests like Chris Brigman (discussing fashion) and Doug Stanhope (a libertarian comedian) supported the anti-IP stance by showing how industries thrive without IP protection, such as fashion benefiting from copying and magic tricks relying on community self-enforcement. Examples of Innovation Without IP Protection [4:13–8:25] Kinsella elaborates on specific examples from the show that challenge the necessity of IP. He points out that fashion designers benefit from copying, which helps establish their trendsetting status, contrary to the belief that IP is essential for innovation. The discussion also covers literature, where the absence of copyright for foreign authors in the 19th-century U.S. allowed widespread access to works like those of Charles Dickens, boosting literacy and making him famous enough to profit from speaking tours. Kinsella critiques the pro-IP attorney’s shift to moral arguments when utilitarian claims faltered, particularly citing the example of a George Harrison song, “My Sweet Lord,” which faced copyright issues for resembling an older tune. He argues that strict IP enforcement could have prevented such cultural contributions, citing cases like the banned Catcher in the Rye sequel and the destruction of Nosferatu copies as instances of IP-driven censorship. Impact of IP on Innovation and Lives [8:25–12:31] The conversation shifts to the broader implications of IP, particularly its detrimental effects on innovation and human lives. Kinsella highlights how patents can stifle life-saving technologies, such as seatbelt mechanisms or drugs like Fabrazyme, which treats Fabry disease. He recounts how patent restrictions and FDA regulations led to drug shortages, causing harm to patients. Kinsella criticizes the pro-IP attorney’s justification of courtroom enforcement as a legitimate means of coercion, comparing it to a sanitized form of thuggery. He references a Spooner quote to argue that state-backed IP enforcement is more insidious than overt theft, as it institutionalizes coercion. Additionally, Kinsella discusses the economic toll of patent trolls, estimating they extract billions annually through legal threats, further hampering innovation and competition. Corporate Interests and Copyright Extensions [12:31–16:06] Lu raises the issue of corporate interests, exemplified by Disney’s copyright on Snow White, a public domain story, and its extensions to protect characters like Mickey Mouse. Kinsella explains how Disney’s lobbying led to the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, prolonging copyrights to life plus 70 years in the U.S., and how the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) has pushed other countries to match this term. He critiques the retroactive extension of copyrights, which pulls works back from the public domain, calling it “crazy” and a distortion of property rights. Kinsella notes the confusion between trademark and copyright in public discourse, even among experts, and highlights the hypocrisy of Disney using public domain works while aggressively protecti

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 170. Episode 325 of the Tom Woods Show: Are Corporations Un-Libertarian? From Tom's show notes (with a few additions from me): Corporations aren’t people, say protestors. Corporations are creatures of the state, say some libertarians. Is there any merit to these complaints? Should libertarians support the corporate form or not? That’s the topic of discussion on today’s episode, with guest Stephan Kinsella. Related Writing by the Guest “Corporate Personhood, Limited Liability, and Double Taxation” “In Defense of the Corporation” “Legitimizing the Corporation” “Causation and Aggression” (with Patrick Tinsley) [See also: KOL115 | Mises Canada Austrian AV Club—Kinsella and the Corporation on Trial (2012) KOL100 | The Role of the Corporation and Limited Liability In a Free Society (PFS 2013) KOL 026 | FreeDomain Radio with Stefan Molyneux discussing Corporations and Limited Liability Left-Libertarianism on Corporations and Limited Liability Rothbard on Corporations and Limited Liability for Tort Comment on Knapp’s Big Government, Big Business — Conjoined Twins Pilon on Corporations: A Discussion with Kevin Carson This Reminds Me of Some Left-Libertarian Criticisms of “Big Business” Defending Corporations: Block and Huebert Run! Run! It’s a Business in a Box! Legitimizing the Corporation and Other Posts ] Book by the Guest Against Intellectual Property Book Mentioned Robert Hessen, In Defense of the Corporation

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 169. I was interviewed today by Daniel Rothschild for his "Live Free, Die Old" Youtube channel. We discussed primarily the fallacious argument that Lockean-libertarian-based property titles are flawed if they are based on conquest or cannot be traced back to the first homesteader. Background material: Rothbard on the “Original Sin” in Land Titles: 1969 vs. 1974 Mises, Rothbard, and Hoppe on the “Original Sin” in the Distribution of Property Rights Justice and Property Rights: Rothbard on Scarcity, Property, Contracts… Property Title Records and Insurance in a Free Society

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 168. Jeffrey Tucker Interviews Stephan Kinsella on Samsung-Apple trial, Laissez-Faire Club (Aug. 27, 2012). Video below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 167. I was a guest in July 2012 on the Liberty Minded show Speaking on Liberty, discussing intellectual property. The hosts, Kyle Platt, Jason Lee Byas, and Grayson English, were very good and asked excellent questions. The show is here, and the video is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 166. I was a guest back on June 6, 2012 on the Peter Schiff Show (guest host Jeff Tucker), discussing problems with patent law. The original audio file for the full show is here; my segment was from 1:00:55 to the end (about 20 minutes total). For the podcast feed I have included only my segment.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 165. This is my Austrian AV Club Interview by Redmond Weissenberger, [RIP] Director of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada, back from May 3, 2012. We had a long-ranging discussion of intellectual property and libertarian theory, including a discussion about exactly how Ayn Rand and other libertarians got off track on this issue, in part because of flaws regarding "labor" and "creationism" in Locke's original homesteading argument; inconsistencies between Rand's support for IP and her recognition that production means rearranging existing property; and also the different roles of scarce means and knowledge in the praxeological structure of human action. (For more on these issues, see my blog posts Locke on IP; Mises, Rothbard, and Rand on Creation, Production, and ‘Rearranging’, Hume on Intellectual Property and the Problematic “Labor” Metaphor, Rand on IP, Owning “Values”, and ‘Rearrangement Rights’, and The Patent Defense League and Defensive Patent Pooling, and my article "Intellectual Freedom and Learning Versus Patent and Copyright.") The video is below as well. (Trivia: I used my iPad, running the Skype app, for this interview. More stable and better camera than a MacBook.)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 164. Friday, Sep. 23, 2011, I conducted a Mises Academy Webinar discussing the America Invents Act, signed into law Sept. 16 2011 by President Obama. I discussed the webinar in a Mises Daily article, Obama’s Patent Reform: Improvement or Continuing Calamity? (archived comments) and discussed the AIA in further detail in The American Invents Act and Patent Reform: The Good, the Meh, and the Ugly. In the webinar, I: summarized the basic problem with patent law from a free-market perspective; presented a series of real patent reforms that could make significant improvement in patent law (short of abolition); explained and critiqued the relevant changes made by the America Invents Act; briefly summarized other imminent IP legislation and treaties on the horizon; and responded to questions from attendees. The slides used in the webinar are provided below. Video Slides:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 163. I was interviewed yesterday by James Sirois of the Critical Thinking is Required podcast, episode 27. The shownotes are below: Released: December 2, 2014 By: James In CTIR Interview 27: Stephan Kinsella (Intellectual Property), I interview Stephan Kinsella about intellectual property. Specifically, we discuss copyright, trademark, patent, and trade secret law. Additionally, we analyze how these various types of law stifle innovation and competition. Critical Thinking is Required is a political and educational podcast for individuals with endless curiosity. Thank you for listening to CTIR. If you enjoyed the show, please share it with your friends. http://criticalthinkingisrequired.com Thank you Mevio’s Music Alley for providing license free music. The intro and outro song is titled "Power Within Me" by Junga World. Sources: https://stephankinsella.com/ http://mises.org/library/against-intellectual-property-0 http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/12/argument-preview-justices-will-use-rare-look-at-trademark-law-to-consider-broad-and-narrow-conceptions-of-trademarks/

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 162. Interview on IP and libertarianism by Fabrizio Sitzia, LibertariaNation.org (Italy) (April 15, 2012; recorded Feb. 23, 2012) I was interviewed Feb. 23, 2012, by Fabrizio Sitzia of the Italian libertarian group LibertariaNation.org. It was posted on YouTube. We discussed intellectual property and related issues such as SOPA, plagiarism, IP-by-contract, and other libertarian issues such as prospects for liberty in the future; the importance of technology, the Internet, and globalism; Ron Paul and electoral politics; and libertarian sentiments and receptiveness among today’s young people. (See also Italian Libertarian IP Debate.) More info at the LibertariaNation post Intervista a Stephan Kinsella (English translation from Google translate).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 161. This was my (remotely delivered) presentation at the 6th Adam Smith Forum, Moscow, Russia (Nov. 2, 2014): From the programme: "Entitled "Argumentation Ethics, Estoppel, and Libertarian Rights," Kinsella discusses the nature and definition of libertarianism and surveys different arguments and theories for its particular conception of rights and politics, including natural rights, consequentialist, and utilitarian approaches. He concludes with an overview of two more recent and unique approaches to justifying libertarian rights, the "argumentation ethics" approach of Austrian economist and political philosopher Hans-Hermann Hoppe, and Kinsella's own "estoppel" theory of rights." This is my second speech at the Adam Smith Forum; the first was “Why Intellectual Property is not Genuine Property,” 3rd Adam Smith Forum, Moscow, Russia (Nov. 12, 2011), also via remote video. I did not prepare a new powerpoint but I drew heavily on the one linked here, and included below. Here is the transcript. The main resources I drew on, which I mentioned in the lecture, include: New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights How We Come To Own Ourselves [Update: See also: Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide,” Mises Daily (May 27, 2011) (includes “Discourse Ethics and Liberty: A Skeletal Ebook”), including: Hans Hermann Hoppe, “On The Ethics of Argumentation” (PFS 2016) The A priori of Argumention, video introduction by Hoppe Lecture 3 of my 2011 Mises Academy course, “The Social Theory of Hoppe” (slides here) Lecture 2 of my 2011 Mises Academy course, “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society” (slides here) my “Dialogical Arguments for Libertarian Rights,” in The Dialectics of Liberty (Lexington Books, 2019) Kinsella, The Genesis of Estoppel: My Libertarian Rights Theory, StephanKinsella.com (March 22, 2016) ————, Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethics and Its Critics, StephanKinsella.com (Aug. 11, 2015) ] These issued were also discussed in further detail in previous Mises Academy courses: KOL155 | “The Social Theory of Hoppe: Lecture 3: Libertarian Rights and Argumentation Ethics” (the slides for this lecture are appended below; links for“suggested readings” for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153) KOL108 | “Why ‘Intellectual Property’ is not Genuine Property,” Adam Smith Forum, Moscow (2011) SLIDES FOR THE SOCIAL THEORY OF HOPPE: LECTURE 3: LIBERTARIAN RIGHTS AND ARGUMENTATION ETHICS Update: As noted here, This talk is from 2014. I was invited to Moscow for the Adam Smith Forum. I decided it would be prudent to deliver my talk remotely. Didn't want to pull a Brittney Griner. Oddly, I was invited a second time to Russia that year, all-expense and paid trip to St. Petersburg & Moscow, to speak for a lecture series by Russian Esquire Magazine in conjunction with http://InLiberty.ru, a Russian NGO. The InLiberty person told me that "unlike its American and British cousins," Russian Esquire magazine "evolved from a men's fashion and lifestyle magazine into more of a public policy and social observer, very libertarian in its editorial policies..." I was skeptical and leery, so ran this by my Adam Smith Institute Moscow contact and he assured me it was legitimate. Still, I let discretion be the better part of valor and declined. I've traveled enough around the world that I have little inclination to go somewhere to "check it off the list," have never had any interest in visiting Asia, the Middle East, Africa, or former commie shitholes. So I declined.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 160. I was on Ben Stone's "Bad Quaker" podcast yesterday, episode 449. We discussed IP and then some of Ben's previous comments on Hans-Hermann Hoppe's views on immigration law. Related links: Bad Quaker podcast: 0448 pc383 Hoppe’s Immigration (corrected) Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s “Immigration And Libertarianism” at Lew Rockwell My article Simple Libertarian Argument Against Unrestricted Immigration and Open Borders

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 159. This is my seminar, Practical Solutions to the IP Trap, delivered to Liberty.me members on May 19, 2014, based on my monograph Do Business Without Intellectual Property (Liberty.me, 2014). This discussion, moderated by Matt Gilliland, provides an overview of IP and the issues faced by people in their careers and lives and offers suggestions as to how to ethically and practically navigate challenges posed by the existing IP system. Transcript below. Youtube: See also: Profiting without IP “Conversation with an author about copyright and publishing in a free society” (Jan. 23, 2012) Do Business Without Intellectual Property (Liberty.me, 2014) “Innovations that Thrive without IP,” StephanKinsella.com (Aug. 9, 2010) “Examples of Ways Content Creators Can Profit Without Intellectual Property,” StephanKinsella.com (July 28, 2010) “The Creator-Endorsed Mark as an Alternative to Copyright,” Mises Economics Blog (July 15, 2010) Diomavro, Avengers endgame or do movies need copyright? Creators SHOULDN’T Own their Creations TRANSCRIPT Liberty.me Seminar: Practical Solutions to the IP Trap Stephan Kinsella Liberty.me, May 19, 2014 00:00:10 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Let me briefly define the background, the topic, and if I say anything that is confusing or anyone has questions, feel free to raise your hand, and Matt can let me know and I’d be happy to address something that I go over too quickly or that needs more elaboration. Intellectual property, in the modern, capitalist, 21st century age, is an entrenched part of the western legal system, America, Europe, etc. and other countries as the west tries to push it and gets it entrenched in those countries. It is considered widely to be part of the capitalist, property rights system. In fact, patent and copyright, trademark and trade secret and other types of intellectual property are called intellectual property for a reason. 00:00:59 It was for a propaganda reason to try to get these things thought of as a property right. Originally, they were thought of as privileges or policy tools by the monarch or the state, but under attack by free-market defenders, the proponents of IP started calling them property rights. So this is where we are now. We have a system where patent law, copyright law, trademark, trade secret, and other types of IP, which I can go into, are basically part of the landscape. 00:01:36 Now, the libertarian position, which I’ve argued for over a decade now, almost two decades now – the libertarian position is that patent and copyright law and other types of IP law are completely, 100% incompatible with free markets, competition, freedom of expression, freedom of speech, and individual property rights. So I’m totally opposed to patent and copyright law. I don’t think we should reform it. That would be a good step. But I think we should totally abolish it. I believe that patents impose hundreds of billions of dollars of damage on the economy of the US, let’s say, every year. 00:02:27 I believe copyrights also impose damage and cultural distortion, and it represses and suppresses freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and it arms the state to come up with excuses to regulate the internet and restrict internet and digital freedom. So there’s basically nothing whatsoever good about patent and copyright and other forms of intellectual property like trademark and trade secret. But they are definitely entrenched, so that’s a fact of the modern world. 00:03:01 And I’ve talked at length on this. I’ve got tons of podcasts and lectures and articles, and so do other people, which I have collected at my website, C4SIF.org. So the background is that we live in a world with lots of non-free-market, non-libertarian interventions and measures and policies and practices and institutions like the drug war, taxation, minimum wage law, regulations, immigration restrictions, war itself, conscription lurking in the background, all these things. They’re there. They’re un-libertarian. We don’t like them, and intellectual property. So the question is what do we do about them? 00:03:46 Well, the political answer is that we should work to abolish them, but this course is more about practical ways that, as a person living in the real world, what do you do about it? So my way of looking at it is that there’s different approaches. Number one, there’s the moral approach. So if your question is, what do I do as a moral person, in particular, as a libertarian, how do I act in the world? Is it legitimate or moral for me to take part of the given system? Can I drive on public roads? Can I take part in the patent and copyright system, etc.? So that’s one type of question. 00:04:33 And then there are other practical questions that relate to this. For example, if I don’t want to use intellectual property, how can I avoid it? Or is it a good idea for me to avoid it or to use it? So all these issues arise. So let me focus really quickly on the two main types o

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 158. This is the final of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course “The Social Theory of Hoppe.” The slides for this lecture are appended below; links for“suggested readings” for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153. Transcript below. LECTURE 6: POLITICAL ISSUES AND APPLICATIONS; HOPPE Q&A Video Slides TRANSCRIPT The Social Theory of Hoppe, Lecture 6: Political Issues and Applications; Hoppe Q&A Stephan Kinsella Mises Academy, Aug. 15, 2011 00:00:01 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Final class. We have a lot to cover. Before I start, let me say don’t be intimidated by the length of the slides if you see them later. There’s a lot of slides. I put a lot of text in there for your reading pleasure later. We’ll skim over some of that. It’s there for – just for a full sort of, almost like a paper for you to study later and for resources. I’m going to try to cover as much of it as I can, and I suspect we’re going to go the full 90 minutes on the lecture. And I’ll be happy to stay as long as we need after that for Q&A, so that’s my plan. 00:00:39 So let’s get going. Slide two. So we talked about economic issues and applications last week. We have a few more to finish tonight, and I will post the final quiz later this week. I think only maybe 15-20% of the class took the midterm, which is fine. You’re not – don’t feel under an obligation to take it. But some of you might find it fun and a good refresher, and you’re not really graded on a per-class basis. It’s just personal grading. So today, we’re going to cover the – we’re going to finish the economic applications and issues from last time. 00:01:19 We’re going to go over the Hoppe Q&A. He did provide me with answers to a bunch of questions that you guys submitted. And then we’re going to talk about a variety of political issues and applications. In addition to the ones we’ve already discussed, of course, argumentation ethics, which is a political-type issue, but some other applications tonight. I didn’t give any suggested readings for this week. There’s just so many little issues. All the links are in these slides, and we’re going to go over them tonight. 00:01:48 So I thought that was sufficient rather than giving you – Karl is asking about the midterm. I don’t – I think it’s probably close already, but Danny can let you know that. If it’s not, I wouldn’t mind having it held open a little bit longer if people who haven’t taken it yet want to take it. Okay, fine. Stephen says it’s still open, so just – it’s only 16 or 18 questions, all multiple choice. Some are funny. Some are harder. Some are easy, so feel free to take it as a refresher. 00:02:21 00:02:28 Karl says sounds went out. Can anyone else hear me? Okay, Karl, it’s your issue. Maybe Danny can help you. Okay, now – so I’m going to get to one of the remaining issues that we had here. I’m only – I’m going to go over these, and a lot of them cover what I think are the highlights so that we can cover a lot. Okay. So a brief review. There is, in the Austrian economics literature, an issue called the “Economic Calculation Debate,” 1920 or so. 00:03:10 Mises wrote a famous article where he argued that one problem with a centrally planned socialist economy, that is, an economy where the government, the state owns the means of production, is that there won’t be market prices for these things. And therefore, you won’t know how to compare alternative projects. When entrepreneurs think about the future, they compare possible uses of resources they have available. And they compare them in terms of what kind of profit they can make in the future, that is, monetary profit. 00:03:42 So the only way to do that is to try to imagine, if I do project A, I might make a million dollars. If I do project B, I might make $2 million, etc., and you compare the projects that way. And then you choose the one with the highest profit, other things being equal, risk, etc., and you do that. So that’s the standard Austrian idea of entrepreneurship, and Mises pointed out, well, without private property ownership of the means of production on a free market, you won’t have prices. And then so the central planners won’t know how to compare these things. They won’t know how to compare a bridge versus a tunnel. You won’t know which one uses more resources. You won’t know which one is more efficient. 00:04:24 So the action they – the decision they make will not be economic even if you just – even if you forget about all the other problems with it, which is self-interest and collusion and corruption etc. So there’s a – for a long time – and then Hayek came along, and Hayek built on Mises’ theory with his knowledge ideas about how – Hayek said that, well – at first he was working within this idea of Mises, the criticism of socialism. And he said, well, another aspect of this is that actors on the market know things, but they don’t know how to express them. Like you kn

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 157. This is the fifth of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course “The Social Theory of Hoppe.” I’ll release the final lecture here in the podcast feed shortly. The slides for this lecture are appended below; links for“suggested readings” for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153. Transcript below. LECTURE 5: ECONOMIC ISSUES AND APPLICATIONS Video [fvplayer id="11"] Slides TRANSCRIPT The Social Theory of Hoppe, Lecture 5: Economic Issues and Applications Stephan Kinsella Mises Academy, Aug. 8, 2011 00:00:00 STEPHAN KINSELLA: … question about – someone sent me in the class course page. Well, I mean if you’re just asking me my opinion, I mean I don’t think Hoppe has written very much on abortion. I actually did include an abortion question in the questions I submitted to him that hopefully he’ll give us some feedback on it for discussion next week. I believe he is generally pro-choice because I remember he asked me one time about, oh, 12 or 15 years ago to try to come up with an argument to justify it. So I don’t know. I’m not assuming there is a flaw in Rothbard’s argument about abandoning the fetus. 00:00:52 My personal view is that certain actions give rise to positive obligations. So if you harm someone or put them in a position of peril, then – push someone in a lake who can’t swim, you have an obligation to rescue them. And I think there’s a similar argument that, because of the nature, the dependent nature of the child, that you have positive obligations to your children because you brought them into the world. So that’s the basic argument. I mean another could be that the fetus is a human who has a right to life, and there is no reason the parent needs to kill it. It’s not really a threat. Now, there are some people written – there’s a book called Solomon’s Knife by Victor Koman, a libertarian science fiction novel, which posits this trans-option procedure. 00:01:47 And the idea is that medical technology permits any woman who’s pregnant to take the baby out and put it into another host mother. So there’s really no reason anymore to have abortions. If you want the baby out, you give it to another woman. That would change the complexity of the debate. Okay, so let’s get going. So I have a lot of slides here. I don’t think we’re going to cover them all. The ones that we don’t cover we’ll talk about next time. A lot of these topics blend into politics and economics. 00:02:20 So some of these are somewhat political as well, and so it would make sense to cover these in the next week as well. So where we left off, we talked about epistemology, and last week, economic methodology and dualism. Okay, so for the methodology part. Today, I want to continue the end of that lecture and talk about a few more things, and then we’ll get to some economic issues and applications. And you see the suggested readings I have here. For next week’s classes, a lot of smaller topics. A lot of blog posts cover these. I don’t know if I will assign the reading ahead of time, but I will have links in the slides for all the things we talk about. 00:03:04 00:03:08 Okay, so let’s go to slide five. Excuse me a second. Let me close my door. Excuse me. Okay, I mentioned last time in the epistemology discussion, there’s a lot of hostility by Rand and objectivists to Kant. And as I mentioned, that is directed towards an idealistic, subjectivist-type interpretation or construction of what Kant wrote. And to the extent they’re characterizing him correctly, I think a lot of their criticisms make sense. 00:03:49 But there – as I mentioned, there’s a realist tradition of Kant that Hoppe and Mises share, and so actually, there’s a lot more similarity between Hoppe and Mises-style Kantianism and Rand’s own view of epistemology. So for example, Ayn Rand talked about an axiom, if you remember, that is sort of analogous to what Kantians would call a priori statements. And she says it’s a statement. It’s like – it’s a fundamental statement and base of knowledge. 00:04:19 And if you look at the end of this quote in the bold, she says: It’s a proposition that defeats its opponents by the fact that they have to accept it and use it in the process of any attempt to deny it. So this is very similar to some of the basic a priori propositions, which you commit a contradiction if you deny them, including Hoppe’s argumentation ethics. She talks about existing and how, if you grasp that, that implies to corollary axioms or propositions, that something has to exist that you’re perceiving and that you exist as a conscious perceiver. 00:04:58 So basically, just right recognizing that there is something gives you the distinction between an observer, a conscious person who exists, and reality. So that’s another way of proving certain things about the world. And again, she notes here that it’s a contradiction in terms to be a consciousness but you’re conscious of nothing outs

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 156. This is the fourth of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course “The Social Theory of Hoppe.” I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. The slides for this lecture are appended below; links for“suggested readings” for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153. Transcript below. Lecture 4: EPISTEMOLOGY, METHODOLOGY AND DUALISM; KNOWLEDGE, CERTAINTY, LOGICAL POSITIVISM Video Slides TRANSCRIPT The Social Theory of Hoppe, Lecture 4: Epistemology, Methodology, and Dualism; Knowledge, Certainty, Logical Positivism Stephan Kinsella Mises Academy, Aug. 1, 2011 00:00:01 STEPHAN KINSELLA: … and methodology and epistemological dualism, the Austrian approach. So if you recall, last time we talked about argumentation ethics and libertarian rights, and as I said, the midterm will be posted shortly. And some of you may be interested in the IP talk I gave at Mises University on Wednesday, which I have a link to here on the slide two. And Hoppe also gave two – he has several lectures, but two of them are particularly relevant for tonight actually. The science of human action and praxeology as a method of economics are both great. They cover a lot of what we’re going to talk about tonight, actually. 00:00:42 00:00:47 So we’re going to talk epistemology and methodology and dualism, which are the Misesian approach, and related aspects of logical positivism and knowledge and certainty. And I’m just going to outline here the readings I had suggested that you read with certain pages of A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism, Hoppe’s pamphlet, “Economic Science and the Austrian Method.” I have my ragged old copy here from years in the past. I don’t know what the current version looks like, notes, so this is my favorite copy, and another paper from EEPP and another journal article on rationalism. 00:01:25 And then there are some supplemental readings if you want to go further. But we’re going to try to cover as much as we can here. So let’s start off talking about what we’re talking – the subject of our lecture is the economic science and the methodology appropriate economic science or the discipline of economics. So what do we mean by the word science? I mean when I was in college and growing up, the word science to me meant what most people think of it now as technology, gadgets, gizmos, physics, theories, chemistry, things like this, things that are testable. 00:02:01 This is actually sort of a fairly new twist on the word science as caused by the rise of positivism and empiricism and what we might call scientism. It’s a much older term of course. You see the little diagram on the right of some spooky government agency, the Information Awareness Office, but they have the all-knowing eye on top of the pyramid looking at the earth and the motto, Scientia est Potentia, which means knowledge is power. So you see the word science there, meaning just general knowledge. In the Lionel Robbins, famous sort of proto-Austrian economist, at one point, wrote a treatise in 1932, very influential treatise until the ‘50s probably called “The Nature and Significance of Economic Science.” 00:02:57 So you can see the word science is being used for even economics, although nowadays, most people would restrict it to the technical or natural sciences. Back in the US Constitution in 1789, in the clause authorizing patent and copyright, look at how the words are arranged here. This is the power granted to Congress to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their writings and discoveries. 00:03:30 So I’ve got in red here the words that pair together: science, authors, and writings. Now, most people would think science has to do with inventions and inventors and discoveries. But no, that’s the useful arts like artisan crafts, machines, things like this. Science meant just the general field of human knowledge, and in particular here, it was referring to artistic creatings of authors like novels or paintings, things like this. So the word science is a general broad term. 00:04:07 Now, we’re going to talk today about epistemology and the nature of economic science. Epistemology – I don’t want to be too basic here, but for those who don’t know, epistemology is a term that used to confuse me when I started reading it in high school and college. It mystified me. But basically, it’s just the study of knowledge. It’s a branch of philosophy, and it’s what Hoppe actually specialized in, which is one reason we’re bringing it up. Now, as Hoppe lays it out, the modern concept of science that I just explained as a narrow idea of science as being technical and causal knowledge, the natural sciences like physics and chemistry, is a fairly modern occurrence. 00:04:56 It started in maybe the 1950s with the rise Popper’s thought and empiricism. Okay, so as Hoppe lays it o

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 155. This is the third of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "The Social Theory of Hoppe." I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. The slides for this lecture are appended below; links for "suggested readings" for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153. Transcript below. LECTURE 3: LIBERTARIAN RIGHTS AND ARGUMENTATION ETHICS Video [fvplayer id="12"] Slides TRANSCRIPT The Social Theory of Hoppe, Lecture 3: Libertarian Rights and Argumentation Ethics Stephan Kinsella Mises Academy, July 25, 2011 00:00:01 STEPHAN KINSELLA: … later. So tonight we’ll talk about argumentation ethics. I have a lot of slides, but some of them will go very fast because they’re just background in case you want to look at them later or if we need some quotes. But let’s go ahead and dive right into tonight’s lecture. By the way, before we start, I’m curious. Who here – well, let me get to the readings page first. I don’t know if I have that up there. Who here read more than the required or suggested reading and onto the more optional reading? I’m just curious how many students have actually read into the argumentation ethics literature beyond the basic stuff I recommended. Anyone? 00:00:49 00:00:54 Okay, Jacob has. Jacob, I’m curious. What did you read beyond the basic stuff? Method essay. For argumentation ethics? Okay. In any case – oh, just by the way, so we’ll have a short quiz for the first – covering the first three weeks, which will start – I’ll have it posted in a few days. I’m leaving tomorrow morning, by the way, for the Mises University, so I’ll be traveling tomorrow, but I’ll try to get it up in a couple days. I wanted to finish this class first before I finish the test so I could make sure I covered only what we talked about in class. Oh interesting, Jacob. Good, so you’ve read a lot. Well, maybe you can help me with some of the difficult questions in here. 00:01:45 So the multiple-choice test will be up in a few days. It’s optional. Don’t feel compelled to take it if you don’t want to. It’s not meant to make anyone feel like they’re going to fail or anything. It’s just a refresher on the course. It’s going to be fun, test your knowledge, and to get the certificate if you’d like. And again, it’s based upon what I say in the lectures, the slides, and also the reading material I mark as suggested but not on the optional reading material. 00:02:11 00:02:15 Okay, so last class we talked about various property issues, how the state arises and the nature of the state, the types of socialism. We started to talk about de-socialization. I don’t know if we’ll have time to get to that tonight. I do have some slides on it at the very end, but I doubt we’ll be able to get to it very much. Anyway, the article is pretty self-explanatory in any case. Maybe we can cover it in lecture number six on political topics or number five on economic topics. 00:02:46 By the way, let me – well, we’ll talk at the end a bit about – next class will be on epistemology and methodology. Okay, so today we’re going to talk about libertarian rights and argumentation ethics. By the way, I have this little mini ad for my last course because I just want to remind people, I did cover some of this in that course in a more summary fashion. And some of that’s included in these slides. I modified it for tonight, and there’s extra stuff here too, but for anyone who took the previous course, some of this I talked about before. But I’m actually leaving out here a lot of the stuff I talked about in the Libertarian Legal Theory course because it’s not directly pertinent to Hoppe’s approach, but some of this will look familiar to some of you. 00:03:29 So tonight we’re going to talk basically about two main questions. We’re we talk about what libertarianism is, at least in different conceptions. And then we’re going to talk about the justification Hoppe provides for it. And if we have time, we can talk about some related approaches to argumentation ethics. The readings for tonight – the suggested readings were primarily my kind of concise overview and Hoppe’s article “From the Economics of Laissez Faire to the Ethics of Libertarianism.” And also his “Justice of Economic Efficiency” and this his “Appendix: Four Critical Replies.” So that was – there’s a lot more out there, but that’s a good sort of overview of what to read to get the flavor of this whole debate. 00:04:18 Now, this will be a little bit elementary for everybody, so I’m going to go over this quickly because I think we probably already know this, but just to kind of get us in the right framework and to refresh us on where we’re going. So let’s think about what is libertarianism about. So it’s a type of political theory compared to other types would be Marxism, forms of leftism and socialism, conservativism, and even modern liberalism or welfare statism or socia

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 154. This is the second of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course “The Social Theory of Hoppe.” I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. The slides for this lecture are appended below; links for“suggested readings” for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153. Transcript below. LECTURE 2: TYPES OF SOCIALISM AND THE ORIGIN OF THE STATE Video Slides TRANSCRIPT The Social Theory of Hoppe, Lecture 2: Types of Socialism and the Origin of the State Stephan Kinsella Mises Academy, July 18, 2011 00:00:00 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Can you guys hear me okay? Video and slide showing? Hello? Test, test. Okay, hey, good evening, everyone. It’s 6 p.m. central time US, later for some of you I know. So let’s get started. If there’s any initial questions about last week’s lecture, which I’ll go over some of in a little bit, I’ll be happy to take them now. But tonight, what I would like to concentrate on, I’ll catch up on some of the things I didn’t cover last time and talk about Hoppe’s views on types of socialism and the origin of the state. And I don’t know if I’ll have time to get to de-socialization. So, by the way, I posted last week a couple of funny things to the forums about “Drop It Like It’s Hoppe,” a sort of rap thing by a friend of mine. And also, a Facts About Hoppe, which I thought were amusing, so hope people enjoyed that. 00:01:02 So let’s go on here. So quick review, last class we talked about basically Hoppe’s place in the Austrian and liberal sort of literature and scheme, his influences, his style, his background, his basic orientation. And we talked about basic fundamental property-based and human-action-based, praxeology-based foundational concepts and principles, which run through most of his work, various implications of the human action axiom like conflict and scarcity, choice and cost, and profit and loss, and ends and means and causality, and the sort of methodological dualistic approach of Mises, which basically is looking at the causal world with the scientific method approach and more empirical approach, that is paucity, physical laws, and then trying to test those laws to see if you can falsify your hypothesis, which is the sort of standard way most people think of science. 00:02:14 But the Austrian view is that’s one type of science. Another type of science is the social sciences, which are focused on – can anyone hear me, or is it just Rick that’s having a problem? Okay, so I’ll keep going. Methodological dualism, which looks at the causal world in one sense and which, in the case of humans, would be human behavior, just analyzing what motions human bodies go through, or trying to understand the human ends and means and purposes – excuse me – which is the teleological realm. And from that realm, we know certain things a priori. We know that humans have ends or purposes. They employ means. There’s opportunity cost. They have choice. There’s a presupposition of causality. 00:03:09 If you didn’t presuppose causality, you couldn’t act because action employs means, which are scarce means in the world, which are causally efficacious at achieving your ends, which are believed to be. So an operative presupposition of action would be causality as well. So these are the a priori things that come from this side of dualism. Then we talked about different property-related concepts like contract, aggression, capitalism, socialism, even the state, which are all defined in terms of this fundamental concept of property. 00:03:43 00:03:46 I’m going to go to slide three. So today we’re going to continue the discussion of property, talk about how the state arises and what its definition is, and then talk about different types of socialism or statism. And if we have time, we’ll get to de-socialization, which I doubt we will actually, but that’s okay. We can cover that next time. The readings would be chapters three, four, and five and, to some degree, six of TSC, Theory of Socialism and Capitalism, also Hoppe’s article “Banking, Nation States, and International Politics,” which is chapter three of his EEPP book, and finally, “De-socialization in a United Germany,” which we may not get to today. 00:04:33 Okay, so let me just make one note. I don’t know if I made this clear enough last time about the concept of property. Many of you may have noticed that this word is used a little bit carelessly by a lot of people, libertarians and others. It’s used sometimes to refer to the scarce resource itself. Like you’ll say my car is my property. So they use the word property to refer to the thing that is owned. But technically it’s more of a relationship or a denotation of the ownership right that’s a legally respected right. 00:05:14 Now, legally doesn’t mean state law. It could mean private law, but basically some kind of institutionalized, legally recognized relationship, that is, a right to control a given resou

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 153. This is the first of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course “The Social Theory of Hoppe.” See also my article "Read Hoppe, Then Nothing Is the Same," Mises Daily (June 10, 2011). The remaining lectures follow in podcast feed. The slides for the first lecture of the Social Theory of Hoppe course are provided below, as are the “suggested readings” for the course. Transcript below. [Update: see also David Gordon, “The Political Economy of Hans Hoppe” (Mises University 2021)] As general background I suggest: Kinsella, “Foreword,” in Hans-Hermann Hoppe, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism (Laissez Faire Books ebook edition, 2013) Kinsella, “Afterword,” in Hans-Hermann Hoppe, The Great Fiction: Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline (Laissez Faire Books, 2012) “Introduction,” with Jörg Guido Hülsmann, in Hülsmann & Kinsella, eds., Property, Freedom, and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Mises Institute, 2009) (published as “Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe,” Mises Daily, Aug. 7, 2009) LECTURE 1: PROPERTY FOUNDATIONS Video [fvplayer id="1"] Slides For slides for all six lectures, plus extensive hyperlinked suggested reading material, see this Libertarian Standard post. SUGGESTED READING MATERIAL The “suggested readings” for each lecture are appended below. Links, where available, are provided; most of these materials can also be found on stephankinsella.com/publications, c4sif.org/resources, mises.org, hanshoppe.com/publications, or on Wikipedia or by google search. LECTURE 1: PROPERTY FOUNDATIONS Chapters 1 & 2, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism [TSC] LECTURE 2: TYPES OF SOCIALISM AND THE ORIGIN OF THE STATE TSC Chs. 3-6 De-Socialization in a United Germany “Banking, Nation States and International Politics: A Sociological Reconstruction of the Present Economic Order” (ch. 3 of The Economics and Ethics of Private Property [EEPP]) LECTURE 3: LIBERTARIAN RIGHTS AND ARGUMENTATION ETHICS SUGGESTED READINGS Kinsella, “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide” Hoppe: EEPP, chapter 11, “From the Economics of Laissez Faire to the Ethics of Libertarianism,” ch. 12. “The Justice of Economic Efficiency,” and “Appendix: Four Critical Replies” OPTIONAL READINGS Kinsella, “New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory” “On the Ultimate Justification of the Ethics of Private Property,” by Hoppe “Beyond Is and Ought,” by Murray N. Rothard “Hoppephobia,” by Rothbard “Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan,” by Stephan Kinsella “Argumentation Ethics and The Philosophy of Freedom,” by Frank Van Dun “Hülsmann on Argumentation Ethics,” by Kinsella LECTURE 4: EPISTEMOLOGY, METHODOLOGY AND DUALISM; KNOWLEDGE, CERTAINTY, LOGICAL POSITIVISM Suggested Readings TSC, Pages 118-144 and 152-155 Economic Science and the Austrian Method Is Research Based on Causal Scientific Principles Possible in the Social Sciences? (ch. 10 of EEPP) In Defense of Extreme Rationalism: Thoughts on Donald McCloskey’s The Rhetoric of Economics [ch. 16 of The Great Fiction] Optional Readings Chapter 9. “On Praxeology and the Praxeological Foundation of Epistemology”; ch. 14. “Austrian Rationalism in the Age of the Decline of Positivism” (from EEPP) On Certainty and Uncertainty, Or: How Rational Can Our Expectations Be? [ch. 14, The Great Fiction] The Science of Human Action (lecture) LECTURE 5: ECONOMIC ISSUES AND APPLICATIONS Suggested Readings Hoppe on Property Rights in Physical Integrity vs Value Hoppe on Liberal Economies and War Hoppe: Marx was “Essentially Correct” Capitalist Production and The Problem of Monopoly (from TSC) Fallacies of the Public Goods Theory & the Production of Security Verstehen and the Role of Economics in Forecasting, or: If You’re so Rich, Why Aren’t You Smart? “Chicago Diversions” [in “The Ethics and Economics of Private Property,” in The Great Fiction] Kinsella, “Knowledge vs. Calculation” Optional Readings The Misesian Case against Keynes The Limits of Numerical Probability: Frank H. Knight and Ludwig von Mises and the Frequency of Interpretation A Note on Preference and Indifference in Economic Analysis Socialism: A Property or Knowledge Problem? LECTURE 6: POLITICAL ISSUES AND APPLICATIONS; HOPPE Q&A n/a *** Background: This is one of the five Mises Academy courses I presented in 2011. The others were: "Rethinking Intellectual Property"; “Libertarian Legal Theory”; “Libertarian Controversies”; and "Obama's Patent Reform: Improvement or Continuing Calamity?" (( Discussed in my article "Obama’s Patent Reform: Improvement or Continuing Calamity?," Mises Daily, Sep. 23, 2011; I discussed the AIA in further detail in The American Invents Act and Patent Reform: The Good, the Meh, and the Ugly) (audio and slides). )) The Hoppe course is discussed in my article “Read Hoppe, Then Nothing Is the Same"; see also Danny Sanchez's post

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 152. This is my speech “Libertarianism After Fifty Years: What Have We Learned?” delivered at the NYC LibertyFest (Brooklyn, NY, October 11, 2014). The original title was "Libertarianism After Fifty Years: A Reassessment and Reappraisal" but I was allotted only about 15-20 minutes so condensed the scope and could only touch briefly on many of the matters discussed. This audio was recorded by me from my iphone in my pocket; video and a higher-quality audio should be available shortly. The outline and notes used for the speech is appended below, which includes extensive links to further material pertaining to matters discussed in the speech. An edited transcript is available here. Speech Notes/Outline Libertarianism After Fifty Years: What Have We Learned? Stephan Kinsella NYC LibertyFest, Brooklyn, NY October 11, 2014 Introduction Modern libertarianism is about 50 years old. Main figures: Rand and Rothbard. “three furies of libertarianism” (Doherty, Radicals for Capitalism): Rose Wilder Lane, Ayn Rand, and Isabel Patterson (1943) Mises, Hayek, Read, Friedman Rand Atlas, 1957; Rothbard, MES, 1962 From a Foreword I wrote for a forthcoming libertarian book: Modern libertarian theory is only about five decades old. The ideas that have influenced our greatest thinkers can be traced back centuries, of course,[1] to luminaries such as Hugo Grotius, John Locke, Thomas Paine, Herbert Spencer, David Hume, and John Stuart Mill, and to more recent and largely even more radical thinkers such as Gustave de Molinari, Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner, Bertrand de Jouvenal, Franz Oppenheimer, and Albert Jay Nock.[2] The beginnings of the modern movement can be detected in the works of the “three furies of libertarianism,” as Brian Doherty calls them: Rose Wilder Lane, Ayn Rand, and Isabel Patterson, whose respective books The Discovery of Freedom, The Fountainhead, and The God of the Machine were all published, rather remarkably, in the same year: 1943.[3] But in its more modern form, libertarianism originated in the 1960s and 1970s from thinkers based primarily in the United States, notably Ayn Rand and Murray Rothbard. Other significant influences on the nascent libertarian movement include Ludwig von Mises, author of Liberalism (1927) and Human Action (1949, with a predecessor version published in German in 1940); Nobel laureate F.A. von Hayek, author of The Road to Serfdom (1944); Leonard Read, head of the Foundation for Economic Education (founded 1946); and Nobel laureate Milton Friedman, author of the influential Capitalism and Freedom (1962). The most prominent and influential of modern libertarian figures, however, were the aforementioned novelist-philosopher Ayn Rand, the founder of “Objectivism” and a “radical for capitalism,” and Murray Rothbard, the Mises-influenced libertarian anarcho-capitalist economist and political theorist. Rothbard’s seminal role is widely recognized, even by non-Rothbardians. Objectivist John McCaskey, for example, has observed, that out of the debates in the mid-1900s about what rights citizens ought to have, "grew the main sort of libertarianism of the last fifty years. It was based on a principle articulated by Murray Rothbard in the 1970s this way: No one may initiate the use or threat of physical violence against the person or property of anyone else. The idea had roots in John Locke, America’s founders, and more immediately Ayn Rand, but it was Rothbard’s formulation that became standard. It became known as the non-aggression principle or—since Rothbard took it as the starting point of political theory and not the conclusion of philosophical justification—the non-aggression axiom. In the late twentieth century, anyone who accepted this principle could call himself, or could find himself called, a libertarian, even if he disagreed with Rothbard’s own insistence that rights are best protected when there is no government at all."[4] We can date the dawn of today’s libertarianism to the works of Rand and Rothbard: to Rand’s Atlas Shrugged (1957); and, especially, to Rothbard’s Man, Economy, and State (1962), Power and Market (1970), and For A New Liberty (1973), plus his journal The Libertarian Forum (1969–1984). For A New Liberty stands today as a brilliant, and early, bold statement of the radical libertarian vision. By the mid-60s, the modern libertarian movement was coalescing, primarily behind the non-initiation of force principle and the “radical capitalism” of Ayn Rand, and Rothbard’s systematic libertarian corpus based upon the non-aggression principle or axiom. It is no surprise that the Libertarian Party was founded in 1971, as these ideas, and the liberty movement, were gaining steam. In the ensuing decades many other influential works appeared expounding on the libertarian idea, such as Linda and Morris Tannehill, The Market for Liberty (1970), John Hospers, Libertarianism: A Political Philosophy for Tomorrow (1971),

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 151. This is my recent speech “Balancing Intellectual Property Rights and Civil Liberties: A Libertarian Perspective,” presented at Branford College at Yale University, New Haven, CT, Oct. 2, 2014, in a lecture series called “The Politic Presents." It was held in the beautiful Trumbull Room at Branford Court, where the accompanying picture was taken. The initial speech is about 33 minutes and was addressed mainly to non-libertarian undergraduate students. I tried to set the stage for those not familiar with Austrian economics, IP or IP theory, libertarianism, without being too basic. These were smart Yale students, after all. This was recorded in my iPhone in my suit pocket, but the quality is okay anyway; and it includes the 33 minute initial lecture and the following 20-minute Q&A session, but then I forgot to turn off my iPhone as I walked to a restaurant with a group of students for dinner, so it also includes some informal but fun Q&A and related conversation as we walked to dinner, for the last 10-20 minutes. Transcript available here.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 150. An interview by the delightful libertarian couple Caity and Dan Greene, from Glasgow, Scotland. We discussed a variety of liberty-related matters, as noted on their show notes for Episode 10: Stephan Kinsella is Founder and Executive Editor of Libertarian Papers, Founder and Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom (C4SIF), a member of the Editorial Board of Reason Papers, and a member of the Advisory Board of the Lexington Books series Capitalist Thought: Studies in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics. A registered patent attorney and former adjunct professor at South Texas College of Law, Stephan has published numerous articles and books on IP law, international law, and the application of libertarian principles to legal topics. He received an LL.M. in international business law from King’s College London, a JD from the Paul M. Hebert Law Center at LSU, and BSEE and MSEE degrees from LSU. He is currently a member of the Advisory Council of theGovernment Wast and Over-regulation Council of the Our America Initiative (2014—), and a Senior Fellow with the Bastiat Institute (2014–). We chat about intellectual property and Stephan's arguments against it, Ayn Rand, free markets, objectivism, anarcho-capitalism, how law may function in a stateless society, the Montessori method of education and more.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 149. My recent appearance on the Non-Aggression Podcast with host Mike Cuneo, aka 412 Libertarian. We talked about IP, Georgism, Stefan Molyneux's use of the DMCA to do a copyright takedown of a critic on youtube, whether Hitler is responsible for the holocaust, and the like. From his show notes: IP And Beyond With Stephan Kinsella – Non-Aggression Podcast I had the pleasure of speaking at length with Stephan Kinsella, a patent attorney, libertarian author and scholar, and head of the Center For The Study of Innovative Freedom, or C4SIV. Stephan also runs the site StephanKinsella.com Causation and Aggression (free PDF file), the paper we spoke about in the later part of the podcast. One of my favorite articles of all time, “What It Means To Be An Anarcho Capitalist.” Kinsella is the author of the groundbreaking book “Against Intellectual Property”(freely available for download) Here is the article that I alluded to when speaking about the marble statue example, as to why creation alone is not sufficient or necessary for ownership.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 148. I was a guest last night on Freedom Feens (Aug 28, 2014): Stephan Kinsella Battles The Copyright Zombies And Patent Trolls – Freedom Feens live radio archive "Stephan Kinsella is an intellectual property attorney who hates intellectual property laws. He explains why, and what can be done about it. It’s one of the best chats we’ve heard from him yet. Derrick J. Freeman and Davi Barker help. Michael W. Dean isn’t there, and Davi is only there sometimes, because some patent somewhere is messing with their Internet." Some links for matters discussed in the show: Personal Audio’s podcasting troll patent:http://www.google.com/patents/US8112504 Man sentenced to federal prison for uploading “Wolverine” movie Tim Lee and Lawrence Lessig: “some punishment” of Swartz was “appropriate”; RIAA Celebrates 15 Year Jail Sentence For Movie and Music Pirate; Six Year Federal Prison Sentence for Copyright Infringement; British student Richard O’Dwyer can be extradited to US for having website with links to pirated movies.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 147. I appeared on the Tom Woods Show today (Aug. 20, 2014, Episode 225), to discuss patents and liberty.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 146. Today I had a discussion with Williamson Evers, about his pathbreaking 1977 article Toward a Reformulation of the Law of Contracts, which was the first article ever published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies (Evers's other JLS articles). This article was relied on heavily by Rothbard, in ch. 19 of The Ethics of Liberty, "Property Rights and the Theory of Contracts." I discuss this piece in detail in my 2003 JLS article "A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability" (now in Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston, Texas: Papinian Press, 2023)), and I also discuss it in my post Justice and Property Rights: Rothbard on Scarcity, Property, Contracts…. See also my post Thoughts on Walter Block on Voluntary Slavery, Alienability vs. Inalienability, Property and Contract, Rothbard and Evers. A fascinating interview. We discussed the genesis of this important theory and related matters. I appreciate greatly Dr. Evers taking time to discuss this matter with me. Note: The purpose of talking to Evers was to ask him questions about his own theory of contract. I sent him a copy of my article as a way to persuade him to talk with me, but my purpose was not to discuss my article with him. However, Evers seemed to think this was the reason for my call and he kept bringing the topic back to my article, when I really wanted to discuss his. In any event, as he was my guest, I did not try too hard to change the topic, and did end up getting a great deal of useful information from him about his original paper and the origin of these ideas. Grok shownotes: [00:00:01 - 00:17:54] Stephan Kinsella interviews Williamson Evers, a Stanford PhD and Hoover Institution research fellow, about the title-transfer theory of contract, a libertarian legal framework pioneered by Evers and Murray Rothbard. Evers recounts the theory’s genesis in the 1970s, stemming from late-night discussions with Rothbard, which led to his seminal 1977 article in the Journal of Libertarian Studies. The theory redefines contracts as transfers of property titles rather than enforceable promises, aligning with natural rights and private property principles. They discuss its revolutionary potential, its underappreciation, and its distinction from traditional legal systems that emphasize expectations or obligations to act, highlighting how all contractual obligations can be reduced to property title transfers. [00:17:55 - 00:34:55] The conversation delves into nuanced aspects of the theory, including future title transfers, bankruptcy, and inalienability. Evers addresses concerns about contracts involving non-existent or future assets, arguing they remain valid, though he opposes debtor’s prison and overly punitive measures like exorbitant performance bonds that could resemble slavery. He critiques the idea of “walking away” from contracts, as seen in mortgage defaults, and emphasizes the need for further research into issues like abandonment of hazardous property and the intersection of inalienability with punishment. Kinsella and Evers agree that the theory requires more development, citing contributions from scholars like Randy Barnett, and conclude with mutual appreciation for the discussion’s depth and its implications for libertarian legal philosophy. Transcript and Grok detailed shownotes below. Update: See also Thoughts on Walter Block on Voluntary Slavery, Alienability vs. Inalienability, Property and Contract, Rothbard and Evers (Jan. 9, 2022). See also KOL197 | Tom Woods Show: The Central Rothbard Contribution I Overlooked, and Why It Matters: The Rothbard-Evers Title-Transfer Theory of Contract. Related links: KOL225 | Reflections on the Theory of Contract (PFS 2017) KOL197 | Tom Woods Show: The Central Rothbard Contribution I Overlooked, and Why It Matters: The Rothbard-Evers Title-Transfer Theory of Contract KOL 029 | First Degree Liberty Interview: Argumentation Ethics and the Title-Transfer Theory of Contract KOL338 | Human Action Podcast Ep. 308 with Jeff Deist: Rothbard on Punishment, Property, and Contract Youtube: https://youtu.be/4tIlPMJeilA GROK DETAILED SHOWNOTES Detailed Segment Summary [00:00:01 - 00:06:42] Introduction and Genesis of the Title-Transfer Theory Kinsella introduces Evers, noting his 1977 article as the first in the Journal of Libertarian Studies. Evers shares his background, his friendship with Rothbard, and their late-night discussions that shaped the theory. The title-transfer theory emerged from Evers’ graduate work at Stanford, where he explored underdeveloped libertarian legal concepts, buildingrived from Rothbard’s initial ideas in 1974 and formalized in Evers’ 1977 article, later used in Rothbard’s Ethics of Liberty. [00:06:43 - 00:15:30] Core Principles and Philosophical Foundations The theory posits that contracts are transfers of property titles, not enforceable promises, aligning with the idea that a

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 145. From Episode 87 of PPL Radio: Join Darryl W. Perry on Peace, Love, Liberty Radio as he brings you news, views and opinions while promoting the ideas of peaceful interaction. The show is live from the LRN.FM studio in Keene, the Shire, Sundays 3-5pm (Eastern). Your calls are welcome at 603-435-1105 A response to Ann Coulter :: NJ school to students: return your laptops to be destroyed :: Florida Judge tells legislature to redraw districts :: Stephan Kinsella joins the show to discuss intellectual property, the history of copyright and patents, and his path to liberty

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 144. I was a guest back in Mar. 28, 2012 on The Corbett Report, with host James Corbett (from Japan), discussing IP. From his description: Corbett Report Radio 099 – Against Intellectual Property with Stephan Kinsella Posted by Corbett Writer, thinker, lawyer and Austro-anarchist libertarian legal theorist Stephan Kinsella joins us to discuss his writing on intellectual property. We discuss the philosophical roots of property rights, how IP differs from those concepts, and how alternative models of making money from creative work are being pioneered in the age of the internet.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 143. Sigh. Yes, IP, as usual. I was a guest on Mar. 26, 2012 on Liberty Conspiracy, with host Gardner Goldsmith, discussing IP and related libertarian matters.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 142. I was a guest on HMS-TV, Feb. 23, 2012, 6:30-7:30 pm CST (Houston's Public Affairs Public Access Live program), with host David Hutzelman. We discussed IP, SOPA, etc. We tried to find a local intelligent and civil pro-IP libertarian or Objectivist to debate me, but no luck (no surprise: There Are No Good Arguments for IP). The video is available on YouTube here, and streamed below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 141. This is from the Jan. 22, 2012 FreeTalkLive in which I was a guest, discussing intellectual property and SOPA. I was on for two hours on FreeTalkLive (1-22-12 show), with hosts Mark Edge and Stephanie. We discussed intellectual property and SOPA.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 140. As noted here, I was a guest Jan. 20, 2012 on the Liberty Underground Radio Show on the 1787 Radio Network, discussing IP for about 25 minutes. The reason they invited me on was the hosts, in discussing SOPA and PIPA in the Dec. 31, 2011 show (hour 1, starting about 10 minutes in), had a dispute about IP. Although the main host questioning me was on the fence about IP, he was open-minded, fair, and civil, and I think he moved a bit in the anti-IP direction by the end. The show has a podcast (feed) and my segment was on the second hour, starting at about 25:25 (audio).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 139. Albert Lu interviewed me for his Power and Market podcast, posted July 29, 2014. Unlike most interviews, we talked about education, career choices, and related matters. This is an edited version of a longer interview. The longer one can be obtained by requesting access here. Other Kinsella biographical material. Lu's description for the longer interview (which will be posted anon): Interview Highlights In this interview, Stephan speaks directly to prospective law students, internet entrepreneurs, and technology capitalists about the practice of law and the dangerous world of intellectual property. We also took time to discuss his own academic career and his multiple transitions from engineering student, to lawyer, to proprietor and independent scholar. This was a fun interview and reminds me of reason I began this project in the first place. https://youtu.be/APSe1pnsxhQ?si=Za4UmfppysBvUPb4 Grok shownotes, episode summary, and transcript below: SHOWNOTES FROM GROK: body { font-family: Arial, sans-serif; line-height: 1.6; margin: 20px; max-width: 800px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; } h1 { color: #333; text-align: center; } .summary { background-color: #f9f9f9; padding: 15px; border-radius: 5px; margin-top: 20px; } .timestamp { color: #888; font-size: 0.9em; font-weight: bold; margin-right: 5px; } p { margin-bottom: 15px; } Power and Market Report: Show Notes with Stephan Kinsella [0:00]In this engaging episode of the Power and Market Report, host Albert Lu interviews Stephan Kinsella, a patent attorney and prominent anti-intellectual property (IP) theorist, from his home in Houston, Texas [1:09]. Kinsella shares his journey from a science enthusiast in rural Louisiana to earning degrees in electrical engineering and law, driven by a passion for both hard sciences and legal theory [1:20]. He discusses how market incentives and personal adaptability shaped his career, emphasizing the importance of optimism and flexibility for young people navigating their professional paths [6:25]. The conversation delves into practical IP concerns, particularly around domain names and trademarks, with Kinsella advising entrepreneurs to conduct thorough trademark searches to avoid legal disputes [10:32]. The discussion also explores the inefficiencies of the IP system, which Kinsella critiques as a "cancer" on the free market, forcing businesses to hire lawyers for unnecessary protections [15:19]. He clarifies the distinctions between copyright, trademark, patent, and trade secret, noting that short titles like “Power and Market” are not copyrightable but may require trademark consideration [19:26]. Kinsella wraps up by sharing productivity tools like j2.com for online faxing and SugarSync for file synchronization, invaluable for his law practice [21:17]. The episode concludes with contact information for Kinsella and an invitation for listeners to access bonus content at powerandmarket.com/bonus [23:57], offering a blend of personal insights, legal advice, and libertarian perspectives on IP and entrepreneurship. body { font-family: Arial, sans-serif; line-height: 1.6; margin: 20px; max-width: 900px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; } h1 { color: #333; text-align: center; } h2 { color: #007BFF; margin-top: 30px; border-bottom: 2px solid #007BFF; padding-bottom: 5px; } .segment { margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 15px; background-color: #f9f9f9; border-radius: 5px; } .timestamp { color: #888; font-size: 0.9em; font-weight: bold; margin-right: 10px; } .description, .summary { margin-top: 10px; } ul { list-style-type: disc; margin-left: 20px; } li { margin-bottom: 10px; } .summary { font-style: italic; color: #555; } Power and Market Report: Detailed Show Notes with Stephan Kinsella This episode of the Power and Market Report, hosted by Albert Lu, features Stephan Kinsella, a patent attorney and anti-intellectual property theorist, recorded on July 29, 2014. Below is a detailed summary of the conversation, segmented into blocks of approximately 5 to 15 minutes, with bullet points, time markers, and enriched descriptions including examples, illustrations, and anecdotes. Each segment provides a deep dive into the topics discussed, tailored for engaging show notes. Segment 1: Introduction and Kinsella’s Background (0:00–6:25, ~6.5 minutes) The episode kicks off with Albert Lu setting the stage from the "Bayou State" (Louisiana), introducing the Power and Market Report as a platform exploring liberty and entrepreneurship. He welcomes Stephan Kinsella, a Houston-based patent attorney with a twist: Kinsella is a leading critic of intellectual property (IP), arguing it’s both unjust and nonexistent. Lu paints a vivid picture of Kinsella’s journey, from a small-town Louisiana kid tinkering with electronics to earning advanced degrees in electrical engineering and law. The conversation dives into Kinsella’s early life, where his curiosity for science and philoso

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 138. This is my appearance on the most recent episode (376) of Ben Stone's Bad Quaker podcast, Recorded July 16, 2014, posted July 27, 2014. From his description page: "Stephan Kinsella and Ben Stone have a chat about getting even, property rights, and how many libertarians can dance on the head of a pin. Links: Stephan Kinsella Against Intellectual Property Getting Even: Forgiveness and Its Limits" We also talked about Tesla and patents.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 137. I participated in an impromptu Google Hangout by Daniel Rothschild for his "Live Free, Die Old" podcast, including Matt Gilliland and James Cox, on the night after I did a Liberty.me seminar. Rambling and casual. We give poor Cox a bit too much grief for being confused and apparently relativist about rights. Good times. *** For an extra, see the Youtube at the bottom, a 30 minute talk between me and Cox, when I was in Banff Canada and lost in the woods and shooting the sh*t with him.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 136. A discussion with Carlos Morales on the Truth Over Comfort podcast. We discuss children's rights, spanking, my article "How We Come To Own Ourselves," "intractable" issues like abortion, etc.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 135. My discussion with Bernie Greene of the Life, Liberty and Proper Tea podcast, released July 18, 2014. From his shownotes: "Stephan Kinsella has made some profound contributions to the liberty philosophy. Here we touch on the nature of law in a free society, IP, democracy vs other forms of tyranny and, of course, pipe smoking. https://stephankinsella.com/ And this is Stephan’s podcast feed. It includes some incredibly interesting stuff including an entire lecture series on Libertarian Legal Theory. I’ve listened to many of the podcasts several times. Truly excellent stuff. https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/kinsella-on-liberty/id595093254"