Kinsella On Liberty

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 084. This is from Episode 415 of the Bad Quaker podcast, with Ben Stone. We talked about a variety of matters, including the legitimacy of the state, intellectual property, and related matters.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 083. This was my appearance on Daniel Rothschild's youtube channel on Sept. 27, 2013; we discussed a variety of topics, including "Intellectual Property, Government, National Defense, and Other Scams".

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 082. This is from the Sunday, Aug. 21, 2011 FreeTalkLive in which I was a guest, discussing intellectual property with Sunday hosts Mark Edge and Stephanie. We talked for about an hour and a half, from 7pm-830pm EDT and had a good, wide-ranging discussion. A few callers called in near the end. This was the FTL debut on XM satellite radio’s “Extreme Talk”, XM 165. This episode is also available on the show's podcast feed here.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 081. I appeared in August 2011 on Adam vs. The Man, talking about drug patents and related issues. Our segment runs from about 22:38 to 28:35.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 080. Ths is from a previous appearance on the Adam vs. the Man show at the RT Network, Episode #28 (May 19, 2011), discussing IP and related matters. As the show's notes describe the episode: Episode #28: Faith & healthcare, Intellectual property rights Tonight on ADAM VS THE MAN with Adam Kokesh: Adam has some good news for you tonight: you are not a pirate. In fact, because it is morally wrong to use the force of government to impede the free flow of ideas, you have the RIGHT to copy music, movies, text, software, inventions, and IDEAS! Speaking of ideas worth copying, Adam has best-selling author and President of Sojourners Jim Wallis in studio and Stephan Kinsella, intellectual property rights attorney, joins Adam from Houston Texas to tell you how to beat back the twisted logic of intellectual property. But that won’t stop the government from imposing a twisted morality of stifling innovation on you to make you feel bad for copying things that big corporations don’t want you to copy. Well tough! Because the internet is here to the rescue! - See more here

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 079. https://youtu.be/BZHIh6so6-Y This is from March 3, 2011: "IP Debate: John Templeton Foundation's Big Questions Debate series on Intellectual Property and Wealth Creation," The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Student Chapter of The Federalist Society (Moritz College of Law, Ohio State University, Columbus OH). Transcript below. This debate was part of the "John Templeton Foundation’s Big Questions Debate series on Intellectual Property and Wealth Creation”; I debated patent attorney and adjunct IP law professor Steve Grant, who represented the pro-IP side. A video was taken with a videocamera, but it was not direct mic'd so the quality is only so-so. The podcast version here is from my iPhone recording, which I often make during speeches as a backup, in case of low quality of the official version. My iPhone version is better quality, for my own remarks, than the audio from the camera (the audio file from the camera's recording is here). Professor Grant did his best, but didn't have a solid argument for IP other than the standard "I think we should reform IP but not get rid of it." My opening speech is about 15 minutes and has decent audio quality, and is a summary of a hard-hitting version of the basic libertarian case against IP law (here is the powerpoint presentation I used; embedded version below). Grant's speech is audible but I was not very close to him; but his conventional and unsystematic, more empiricist and positivist than libertarian and principled remarks will be of only mild interest to libertarians. For my 10 or so minute rebuttal to him, I left my iPhone at the table but it's still audible; for the Q&A period, it was in front of me so it's decent again for that part. My host was Aman Sharma, a very staunch libertarian law student and head of the student chapter of the Federalist Society. When I was involved with the Federalist Society (lawyers chapters) in Philadelphia and Houston they were populated with mainly Newt Gingrich loving neocons; good to see some Austro-libertarians infiltrating their ranks. Sharma told me "I had a lot of fellow students approach me after the event with questions showing a new-found interest in the Mises/Austrian worldview." That is cool and gratifying. While in Ohio, I met my friend Jacob Huebert and other local libertarians/Federalist Society people—including Katelyn Horn and Maurice Thompson, of the 1851 Center, for dinner at Barrio Tapas. A fun trip, and great people. https://youtu.be/xkYeJ4_ULs0?si=X7xiWAu168WSIcxl TRANSCRIPT (from Youtube) 0:02 good afternoon president of the federal 0:07 society on behalf of more federal society and I get lost inside here more so I welcome you to today's event 0:14 entitled isn't Alexa property he relevant anymore proud to have the John Templeton 0:19 Foundation sponsors for this event they've got excellent catered food we hope you're enjoying I wanna mention 0:26 just a few things before we get going the first is that elections with minimal water out of Schneider come out at the 0:31 end of this month we an email out on the twin deserves so if you're on plan and you're on our site will be able to get 0:38 the updates for that the boudin and whatever on that sort of thing next I'll explain the format and then 0:44 I'll get started with the brief introduction of speakers and we'll get going here first the format as usual it is going to 0:50 allow for debate so we're gonna have clothing productions by each speaker starting with our guest speaker 0:56 purchased upon detail and we'll have a ten minute rebuttal in the same order on the Washington answer session with you 1:03 the members of the audience so let's start with her grandmother Stephen grant 1:08 practices with assembly wall group in Dublin in the field intellectual property is most particular expertise as 1:14 the prosecution of us had an application that originated in and offices he's been admitted to 1:20 practice before the ten years the US Patent and Trademark Office the Supreme Court of Ohio they go in there namaha a 1:25 federal district court and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals he's been frequent speaker continuing legal education courses as well as 1:32 general education presentations for adventures writers and artists he's a regular contributor to the newsletter of 1:37 the Ohio State Bar Association intellectual property law section he said a number of laws around the country including at warrants and he's their 1:44 first teaching ability and stephan kinsella is a registered patent attorney and general counsel for applied 1:50 optoelectronics already former partner with 20 more he's pressed me to run into patent applications where i've had 1:56 clients ability intelligent and others this is Beach FL dental lumineer seasoned student editor

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 077. Lions of Liberty podcast. From Marc Clair's podcast description: Episode 1: Stephan Kinsella September 13, 2013 In this inaugural edition of the Lions of Liberty Podcast, host Marc Clair interviews libertarian legal scholar Stephan Kinsella about the concept of intellectual property and the libertarian framework. Lions of Liberty Podcast, Ep. 1: Stephan Kinsella Finally! The long-anticipated Lions of Liberty Podcast has arrived! In this first episode, I spoke with Stephan Kinsella regarding the subject of intellectual property within the libertarian framework. Kinsella is the author of Against Intellectual Property, and is one of the best-known voices in the libertarian community against the concept of intellectual property. I found the conversation with Kinsella very interesting and I feel it will be helpful not only for those trying to sort out a stance on intellectual property, but also for those new to libertarian ideas in sorting out some of the finer details of a libertarian framework. Before launching into tirades about “private property” and “contracts”, it’s important to have a firm grasp on the definitions of these terms. I first came to the IP debate through the “debate” between Kinsella and Robert Wenzel on the issue, which served more as car-crash entertainment than an intellectual study. But it did peak my interest in an area I had honestly not given much thought to before. After reading his book and speaking further with him on the issue, I find it difficult to present a case in favor of intellectual property, at least as we know the concept today. The biggest problem I see with intellectual property is that it attempts to bind third parties, not privy to any sort of contract, and prohibit them from using their own property in a way they see fit. I tend to agree with Kinsella’s view that intellectual property is nothing more than the State’s granting of a monopoly on an idea or a pattern of ideas. The biggest difference between Kinsella and myself is that I may see a private society, sans the State, as coming up with more ways to protect their works through contracts and/or user agreements, but ultimately that can only go so far. Any differences we may have on just how far private arrangements to protect the work of artists may go are largely moot. When it comes to forming a libertarian position on a subject, we should not be asking “how will this work?” but “what is right?” Your feedback is welcome and encouraged! This is my first attempt at conducting an interview or producing a podcast, so I promise I won’t be offended. Drop me an email at [email protected]. I have some interesting guests planned for future shows, so stay tuned!

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 077. In this podcast, recorded during my morning constitutional (stroll/walk), I discuss my take on how best to view the libertarian idea: its origins and basic concepts, from homesteading to body-ownership, inalienability, intellectual property, "coercion" vs. aggression, state vs. government, tactics and strategy and terminology and semantics vs. substance, etc., drawing mostly on the ideas of Locke, Rothbard, and Hoppe. Relevant links: How We Come To Own Ourselves, Mises Daily (Sep. 7, 2006) (Mises.org blog discussion; audio version) The Problem with “Coercion” “What Libertarianism Is,” Mises Daily (August 21, 2009) Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach, 12:1 Journal of Libertarian Studies 51 (Spring 1996). A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability, Journal of Libertarian Studies 17, no. 2 (Spring 2003): 11-37 On the Danger of Metaphors in Scientific Discourse “Intellectual Property Rights as Negative Servitudes,” Mises Economics Blog (June 23, 2011) (C4SIF) Hoppe, chs. 1-2 of A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian Approach “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer 1995), p. 132. (From an earlier note of mine about this: I have since changed my mind on the some of the issues regarding the Hayekian “knowledge problem” and Leoni’s work in this regard, as I have noted in subsequent articles, such as the Knowledge, Calculation, Conflict, and Law article, footnote 5. Oh, that I had heeded Jeff Herbener’s comments on an earlier manuscript, but I either got these comments too late, or did not fully appreciate them at the time. More information on the calculation debate.)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 076. IP Debate with Chris (aka "Sid Non-Vicious") LeRoux, hosted by James Cox. LeRoux claims to be an anarcho-capitalist and former Randian but not a libertarian (he doesn't like labels, you see). He was recently arguing kinda for IP-but-not-really on Shanklin's podcast (see below), and contacted me about these issues. As you can see from the "debate" it's not clear what his position is or why he even wanted to debate me, or what he really disagrees with me on, but, .... here it is. Cox did a good guy trying to moderate, but it ended up being a mess, as it always is with people that are not clear on basic libertarian concepts and not totally opposed to IP. Transcript below. Relevant links: How We Come To Own Ourselves, Mises Daily (Sep. 7, 2006) (Mises.org blog discussion; audio version) A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability, Journal of Libertarian Studies 17, no. 2 (Spring 2003): 11-37 [based on paper presented at Law and Economics panel, Austrian Scholars Conference, Auburn, Alabama (April 17, 1999)] “Intellectual Property Rights as Negative Servitudes,” Mises Economics Blog (June 23, 2011) (C4SIF) Hoppe, chs. 1-2 of A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian Approach The Libertarian Approach to Negligence, Tort, and Strict Liability: Wergeld and Partial Wergeld The Problem with “Fraud”: Fraud, Threat, and Contract Breach as Types of Aggression The Libertarian View on Fine Print, Shrinkwrap, Clickwrap Youtube: https://youtu.be/14POluaBwqU James Cox's original Youtube: https://youtu.be/wgJOeWU1Bek Shownotes (Grok): Debate Introduction and Setup [00:00:01 - 00:01:12] Host James Cox introduces the IP debate between Stephan Kinsella and Chris LeRoux, noting their positions (Kinsella against IP, LeRoux's stance to be clarified). Cox promotes his YouTube channel and outlines rules: 3-minute opening statements, alternating questions with 2-minute responses, initial 20-minute limit, possible extension. LeRoux agrees to go first. LeRoux's Opening: Contract Rights as Absolute [00:01:12 - 00:02:13] LeRoux claims Kinsella has admitted contract rights are absolute in an anarcho-capitalist system, not subject to scarcity or rivalrousness interpretations. He argues interfering with contracts (what Kinsella calls IP) is violence, violating nonviolence principles. LeRoux yields his remaining time. Kinsella's Opening: Clarifying Positions and IP Definition [00:02:18 - 00:05:19] Kinsella requests LeRoux clarify his position, noting prior exchanges where LeRoux rejected IP labels, libertarianism, and scarcity's role in property. Kinsella affirms contract rights but argues they can't replicate IP, as IP is in rem (against the world), while contracts are in personam (between parties). He defines IP as state-protected rights in non-rivalrous resources (ideas, patterns), including copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, deeming them illegitimate as they undermine real property rights. Contracts are title transfers, not binding promises; third parties can't "interfere" with contracts, only property. Initial Back-and-Forth: Contract as Core of Property [00:05:19 - 00:08:20] LeRoux asserts contract rights are all that exist; no need for scarcity/rivalrousness. Anything voluntarily traded is property, irrelevant to others' opinions. In anarcho-capitalism, contracts include third-party arbitration. Current IP issues: tax-funded, enforces involuntary contracts. Voluntary restrictions (e.g., no file sharing) must be upheld. Scarcity is subjective/physical, individually assessed. Kinsella critiques LeRoux's incoherence, clarifies scarcity as rivalry (not abundance), defends rivalrous resources as ownable (e.g., bucket of sand). Modern IP's flaws include involuntary application beyond taxes. Debate on Rivalrousness and Property Definitions [00:08:20 - 00:12:36] LeRoux calls rivalrousness an "anti-concept," nonsensical; voluntary trade defines property. Ideas drive property; can be commoditized/contracted (e.g., oppose copyright but discuss voluntary "do not redistribute" book contracts). Kinsella rebuts: contracts don't require ownership (e.g., conditional payments); human action uses rivalrous means. Enforceable book use restrictions possible but unlikely due to piracy incentives. Clarifying Disagreements and Contract Examples [00:12:40 - 00:16:30] LeRoux questions Kinsella on contracts without property (denied by Kinsella); defines property as exclusive control/use/disposal. Fraud involves trading unowned items. Debate shifts to open interchange per moderator. LeRoux asserts self-ownership includes labor; Kinsella prefers body ownership, questions "self" vagueness. Self-Ownership, Body Ownership, and Mind Control [00:16:30 - 00:19:00] LeRoux defends self-ownership encompass

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 075. This is my appearance on Michael Shanklin’s Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast with Michael Shanklin (Aug. 26, 2013). We discussed a variety of issues, as noted in the subject line. Some background material for these topics can be found at: Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan, Anti-state.com (Sept. 19, 2002) (reply to Bob Murphy and Gene Callahan, Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethic: A Critique; debate discussed in this forum) How We Come to Own Ourselves Hoppe, “Of Private, Common, and Public Property and the Rationale for Total Privatization” What Libertarianism Is The Blockean Proviso The relation between the non-aggression principle and property rights: a response to Division by Zer0 Thoughts on the Latecomer and Homesteading Ideas; or, why the very idea of “ownership” implies that only libertarian principles are justifiable California Gay Marriage Law Overturned: What Should Libertarians Think? Advice for Prospective Libertarian Law Students Our previous discussions: KOL 043 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Bitcoin, Legal Reform, Morality of Voting, Rothbard on Copyright and KOL 025 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Intellectual Property, Ron Paul vs RonPaul.Com, Aaron Swartz, Corporatism.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 074. This is my interview from The Libertarian. It was released as The Libertarian: Podcast #1. We discussed libertarian theory, Hans-Hermann Hoppe's libertarian views, argumentation ethics, immigration, and related matters. https://youtu.be/r4_dST5VvAY For further background on these topics see: Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide A Simple Libertarian Argument Against Unrestricted Immigration and Open Borders What Libertarianism Is I also did a previous written interview for that site: Interview by The Libertarian (2013).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 073. I was a guest today on Freedom Feens radio. We talked about a variety of issues—property rights, education, and the Libertarian Macho Flash, among other topics.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 072. I was interviews for Vrijheid Radio (Netherlands) last week, by host Henri Serton. We talked about libertarian property theory, Locke, intellectual property, and related issues. I think it was a very good interview, maybe one of the best I've participated in, due in no small part to Serton's intelligent prodding and questions. SoundCloud link;

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 071. This is my appearance at a New York University School of Law/Journal of Law and Liberty Symposium: “Plain Meaning in Context: Can Law Survive its Own Language?” (February 18, 2011); my panel was “Intellectual Property Law and Policy." Our panel was preceded by a keynote speech on a somewhat unrelated topic by Professor Richard Epstein, and featured me and two law professors specializing in IP law. After Epstein's keynote speech, (( Richard A. Epstein, "Plain Meaning in Context: Can Law Survive Its Own Language?", New York University Journal of Law and Liberty 6, no. 2 (2011): 359–392. )) my talk was first. The podcast here omits Epstein's speech and begins with my own talk, and continues with the other two panelists' talks and the Q&A session in which I answered a few questions. The full video, which includes Epstein's introductory talk, is online here and included below. Note: near the end of Epstein's speech (at 48:11, in the embedded video version) I asked him a question about federalism and the doctrine of selective incorporation; he gave a fair answer, but one I disagree with on the grounds the privileges and immunities clause did not unambiguously mean to incorporate a large set of "fundamental rights" into the Fourteenth Amendment, as Raoul Berger has argued. On the IP panel, a more general Q&A and interpanelist interchange session starts around 1:53:14 in the video (57:35 in this podcast excerpt), with me drawing a lot of the questions from fellow panelists and the audience. I was the only one who used a powerpoint; it cannot be seen from the posted video, so the file is here: The problem with IP, and also embedded also below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 070. I was a guest recently on Red Ice Radio (Sweden), with host Henrik Palmgren, which was broadcast on the July 3, 2013 show. This is hour 1; hour 2 is available to paying subscribers of Red Ice Radio. From the site's description of the episode: Stephan Kinsella - Hour 1 - Against Intellectual Property July 3, 2013 Stephan Kinsella is Founder and Executive Editor of Libertarian Papers, Founder and Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom (C4SIF), and a member of the Editorial Board of Reason Papers. 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. In the first hour, we'll discuss individual property and intellectual property. Stephan explains the purpose of property rules and rights. He'll discuss John Locke's principle of first appropriation or the homestead principle. Locke argued in support of individual property rights as "natural rights." We tie this into the Libertarian debate verses other political parties. Then, Kinsella argues the negative impact of intellectual property. He also explains how intellectual property laws control freedom of speech and violate various constitutional amendments. In the member's hour, Stephan continues to give examples to state his case against intellectual property. We hear how the state profits from these copyright, trademark and patent laws. And we'll learn about the inordinate power of the copyright industry. He talks about how we'd prosper if the current gatekeeper, guarding intellectual property, eroded as it does more damage than good. Later, we'll discuss the true free market. Today laws are in place protecting companies from competition. The hour ends on where things are heading and the impact of technological change.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 069. I was a guest on the Feb. 15, 2011 episode of Thinking Liberty, “an interactive libertarian anarchist talk program.” We talked for quite a while about IP; the hosts asked very intelligent questions. This podcast episode begins with my segment, which originally started about 25:00 into the original episode.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 068. From the shownotes: "Why Man Made Law Is Slavery! In this video I talk to Stephan Kinsella of https://stephankinsella.com We talk about man made law and how it is better to just have contracts with one another." Youtube: Original:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 067. I recorded this one during my morning walk. Forgive the audio imperfections, but I had the audio tweaked so it's not bad. I discuss the argument for the unconstitutionality of IP, namely patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret, which I discussed in a previous post, Copyright is Unconstitutional. For further details, see that post. Update: One further argument for the unconstitutionality of copyright that I forgot to mention in the podcast is one I mentioned in the referenced post. Namely, the Patent Clause in Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to award patents “to promote the Progress of Science ... by securing for limited Times to Authors ... the exclusive Right to their respective Writings....” The copyright clause only authorizes Congress to protect an author’s “writings.” To the extent copyright law covers things other than writings–like paintings, movies, music, sculptures, photographs, software code (or at least look-and-feel aspects), boat hull designs–it is also clearly unconstitutional. See also Michael H Davis, "Extending Copyright and the Constitution: "Have I Stayed Too Long,"" 52 Florida Law Review 989 (2000), arguing that the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act is unconstitutional

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 066. LiveFreeFM (IP), with Nathan Fraser (May 26, 2013): Stephan Kinsella joins us this week to discuss his work as a patent lawyer and libertarian, and how it has brought him to the forefront of the anti-IP movement. We discuss the legalities involving intellectual property, the morality of the concept, and whether or not it serves the utilitarian purposes that are used to justify it. Then, towards the end of the show, we discuss emerging technologies that are challenging the validity of intellectual property.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 065. I was a guest on The Medical Freedom Report Podcast, with host Michael Ostrolenk, a couple years ago, discussing Patents on Medical Technology and Pharmaceuticals (Feb. 24, 2011). Patents & Copyrights: intellectual property rights or monopoly control of ideas? Why are medical devices protected by patent law while medical procedures are exempt? And what about the government’s use of compulsory licenses to force pharmaceutical companies to produce certain drugs like CIPRO. These are two medical-related examples in a long list of arcane exceptions and arbitrary details written in to intellectual property (IP) law. It is commonly believed that IP rights, such as patents, copyrights, and trademarks are necessary to foster innovation and protect the interests of the people and companies that create new products and ideas. Patent attorney Stephan Kinsella of the Mises Institute, holds an opposite view, and in this podcast with Michael Ostrolenk, discusses the growing movement that views IP law as not only anti-competitive and a barrier to innovation, but also as incompatible with true property rights. Michael and Stephan also talk about the evolution of IP from laws like the 1709 Statute of Queen Ann, an attempt by the monarchy to control the output of book printers, the influence of which carried into the copyright and patent provisions in the U.S. Constitution.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 064. This is my appearance on the Katherine Albrecht radio show, discussing net neutrality (Dec. 22, 2010). For more information, see my post Against Net Neutrality. Here is the link to the show page for this episode.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 063. I was a guest on the “Live and Let Live” radio show with Gary Johnson discussing IP (Nov. 14, 2010).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 062. This is my speech "Intellectual Freedom and Learning versus Patent and Copyright," at the 2010 Students For Liberty Texas Regional Conference (report), University of Texas, Austin. I discussed this previously in my post Kinsella Speech at Students for Liberty – Texas Conference (Austin), on “Intellectual Freedom vs Patent and Copyright”. An edited transcript appears in my article “Intellectual Freedom and Learning Versus Patent and Copyright,” Economic Notes No. 113 (Libertarian Alliance, Jan. 18, 2011); also published as “Intellectual Freedom and Learning Versus Patent and Copyright,” The Libertarian Standard (Jan. 19, 2011). The video is below. Related: KOL062 | “Intellectual Freedom and Learning versus Patent and Copyright” (2010) Kinsella Speech at Students for Liberty – Texas Conference (Austin), on “Intellectual Freedom vs Patent and Copyright” Intellectual Freedom and Learning versus Patent and Copyright Kinsella: “Intellectual Freedom and Learning Versus Patent and Copyright” Stephan Kinsella on Intellectual Property Grok shownotes: In this engaging lecture delivered at a Texas university, Stephan Kinsella, a self-described Rothbardian anarcho-capitalist, critiques intellectual property (IP) laws, specifically patents and copyrights, from a libertarian perspective (0:00-1:46). Kinsella introduces his topic by emphasizing the importance of learning and knowledge in human action, drawing on Ludwig von Mises’ praxeology to explain how individuals use scarce resources to achieve goals, guided by information (1:47-7:04). He argues that the free market thrives on emulation and competition, which depend on freely sharing ideas, and contrasts this with IP laws that artificially restrict knowledge dissemination, undermining the market’s ability to overcome scarcity (7:05-15:02). Using examples like baking a cake or improving a mousetrap, Kinsella illustrates how knowledge informs action without requiring ownership of ideas, setting the stage for his critique of IP as a state-imposed monopoly. Kinsella delves into the flawed logic behind IP, particularly the “creation argument” that equates creating something with owning it, which he refutes by showing that creation merely transforms already-owned resources (15:03-21:26). He traces the historical roots of patents and copyrights to monopolistic privileges and censorship, highlighting their origins in state control rather than market principles (21:27-26:49). Through examples like a Teflon-coated mousetrap and references to modern cases like Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook, Kinsella argues that IP laws rob individuals of their property rights by restricting how they can use their own resources (26:50-29:26). He concludes by urging young libertarians to champion intellectual freedom, reject the artificial scarcity imposed by IP, and embrace the free exchange of ideas as essential to a prosperous market (29:27-29:49). The lecture leaves room for questions, emphasizing its interactive and provocative nature. [fvplayer id="13"] From Grok: Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s lecture critiques intellectual property (IP) laws, arguing they impose artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas, contradicting the free market’s goal of overcoming scarcity. He uses Austrian economics, particularly Mises’ praxeology, to frame human action and the role of knowledge, showing how IP undermines competition and emulation. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block of the 29:49-minute video. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Context (0:00-1:46): Kinsella introduces himself as a Rothbardian anarcho-capitalist, expresses disdain for the state, and highlights Texas’ potential for secession. He sets up his talk on learning and IP at a university. Human Action and Learning (1:47-7:04): Explains Mises’ praxeology, emphasizing how knowledge guides human action by informing choices of ends and means, using the example of baking a chocolate cake. Scarcity and the Free Market (7:05-15:02): Discusses how the free market uses private property to allocate scarce resources, fostering cooperation, competition, and emulation, which rely on free knowledge exchange. Critique of Creation Argument (15:03-21:26): Rejects the notion that creation grants ownership, arguing that creation transforms owned resources, not ideas, and compares IP to welfare rights as redistributive. History of Patents and Copyrights (21:27-26:49): Traces IP’s origins to monopolistic privileges and censorship, citing the Statute of Monopolies (1623) and Statute of Anne (1710) as state-driven controls. Practical Examples and Modern Relevance (26:50-29:26): Uses a Teflon-coated mousetrap to show how patents restrict property rights and references Zuckerberg’s defense in The Social Network to argue that copying ideas is not theft. Call to A

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 061. This is my speech “How Intellectual Property Hampers Capitalism,” from the Mises Institute Supporters’ Summit: “The Economic Recovery: Washington’s Big Lie” (Oct. 9 2010, Auburn Alabama). A transcript is here; see also the article based on this talk: “How Intellectual Property Hampers the Free Market,” The Freeman (June 2011). The Youtube video is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 060. This is a Discussion of intellectual property and libertarianism on Ernest Hancock's Declare Your Independence radio show (Sep. 14, 2010). I was on the show for about two hours (hours 2 and 3 of his show) discussing intellectual property. It was a pretty wide-ranging, radical discussion, but I think I made progress with Ernie (update: I since met Ernie in person at Libertopia 2012 and we had a nice visit together). The MP3 files are on the show’s page for that day; local files: hour 1; hour 2; hour 3.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 059. From: Libertarian Parenting--A Freedomain Radio Conversation with Stephan Kinsella, FreeDomain Radio #1689 (Thursday, 1 Jul 2010): "Two libertarian parents discuss how to best raise confident and freethinking children, including discipline without aggression, spanking, Montessori education, resolving conflicts and teaching skepticism and rationality." See also: my TLS post Stefan Molyneux’s “Libertarian Parenting” Series; and my post Montessori and "Unschooling". n.b.: The video is down, probably as a result of Molyneux's being de-platformed.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 058. I appeared on the Gene Basler Show (May 30, 2010), discussing a variety of anarcho-libertarian matters–environmentalism, nuclear power, state propaganda in government schools, class action lawsuits, reparations, how to achieve an anarcho-libertarian society, animal rights, positive rights and obligations, forced heirship, and so on (an edited transcript to appear as a chapter in Gene Basler, Environmental Non-Policy: Interviews on Environment, War and Liberty, forthcoming August 2011). https://youtu.be/e6NkAno4HTA Transcript Gene Basler Show: Anarcho-Capitalist Issues Stephan Kinsella and Gene Basler Gene Basler Show, May 30, 2010 00:00:05 Gene: Welcome folks. This is Gene Basler, your host. This is episode eight of the Gene Basler Show, formerly called Anarcho Environmentalism. Today is Sunday, May 30, 2010, and I’m pleased to welcome as my guest Stephan Kinsella. Are you there, Stephan? 00:00:22 Stephan Kinsella: I’m here. Glad to be here, Gene. 00:00:24 Gene: Thanks for coming on. Let me read Stephan’s profile on Wikipedia. Kinsella is General Counsel of Applied Optoelectronics, Inc., of Sugar Land, Texas. A practicing intellectual property attorney and former adjunct professor of law at South Texas College of Law where he taught computer law, Kinsella is actively involved with libertarian legal and political theory, and is adjunct scholar of the Mises Institute, as well as the former Book Review Editor for the Institute’s Journal of Libertarian Studies. 00:00:57 He is also a contributor to the news and opinion blog at LewRockwell.com and is the creator of Libertarian Papers, a peer-reviewed online journal published under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. He writes that, after college, he “began to put more emphasis on Austrian economics and paleo-libertarian insights of Rothbard, Hans-Hermann Hoppe and Rockwell”. 00:01:23 Kinsella’s legal publications include books and articles about patent law, contract law, e-commerce law, international law and other topics. Kinsella has also published and lectured on a variety of libertarian topics, often combining libertarian and legal analysis. Kinsella’s views on contract theory, causation and the law, intellectual property, and rights theory (in particular his estoppel theory) are his main contributions to libertarian theory. 00:01:53 In contract theory, he extends Murray Rothbard’s and Williamson Evers’ title-transfer theory of contract, linking it with inalienability theory while also attempting to clarify that theory. Title-transfer theory of contract: Kinsella sets forth a theory of causation that attempts to explain why remote actors can be liable under libertarian theory. He gives non-utilitarian arguments for intellectual property being incompatible with libertarian property rights principles. He advances the discourse ethics argument for the justification of individual rights, using an extension of the concept of estoppel. Welcome to the show, Stephan. 00:02:33 Stephan Kinsella: Thanks very much, Gene. 00:02:35 Gene: Okay. Here at Anarcho-Environmentalism, we—namely I—argue that there are indeed real environmental concerns out there. We argue that air pollution, water pollution, etc., are indeed real environmental concerns, that global climate change ain’t one of ‘em, and that market and voluntary solutions are preferable to government or policy-based solutions. 00:03:18 I guess my first question for you is, as an expert in patent law, do you think the existence of patent law is really nothing more than just one more way government runs block for favored and well-connected market participants by protecting environmentally irresponsible means and methods of production? And if so, does this not logically follow that patent law harms the environment? 00:03:46 Stephan Kinsella: Well, that’s an interesting connection. I mean for years now I’ve been trying to make – trace out all the harms from patent law. Environmentalism is not one I have made yet. I could see that some arguments could be made. I do think that patent law is a type of protectionism, similar to minimum-wage law and antitrust law, sort of counterintuitively, and that they do protect the larger companies. For example, most of the smaller entrants to businesses or to new markets don’t have a large patent portfolio or the ability to get it. 00:04:28 But you get these large, established market participants; they amass large patent portfolios, and what this does is, it basically protects them from suits from each other, because if one guy sues another guy, then they could be countersued, based upon the other guy’s portfolio. So you can think of these guys as big porcupines. 00:04:50 They all have large, defensive quills, but they’re sometimes afraid to sue each other, or if they do sue each other, then they all come up with a settlement, and they cross-license to each other their patents. Of course, what this does is it lets them keep operating. N

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 057. I was on The Peter Mac Show on May 12, 2010, with my fellow Libertarian Standard co-blogger Rob Wicks. We discussed a variety of matters, including whether libertarians should use the word “capitalism,” also anarchy, IP and other topics.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 056. I was a guest on the May 9, 2010 episode of BlogTalkRadio’s show Anarchy Time, hosted by James Cox. Other guests included C4SS Development Specialist Mariana Evica, Wilt Alston, and Stefan Molyneux (also podcast at Freedomain Radio #1659: “The Immigration Roundtable – BlogTalkRadio with Stephan Kinsella, Wilt Alston and Stefan Molyneux: A roundtable discussion on the challenge of immigration.”)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 055. This is from The Voluntary Life, Author Interview: Stephan Kinsella on Against Intellectual Property (March 20, 2010; also podcast as Episode 1616 of Freedomain Radio, as Stefan Molyneux joined in too). Interviewed by Jake. See also their interesting episode Against Intellectual Property: A Follow Up Discussion. https://youtu.be/HnXgJZXfY7g?si=etBFxpbep0tuhBb- Shownotes Episode Title: KOL 055 – The Voluntary Life Author Interview: Stephan Kinsella on Against Intellectual Property (2010) Guests: Stephan Kinsella (registered patent attorney, libertarian theorist, Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom, editor of Libertarian Papers) Host: Jake (The Voluntary Life) Special participant: Stefan Molyneux Length: Approximately 70 minutes Overall Summary In this 2010 interview, Stephan Kinsella explains the core arguments from his influential monograph Against Intellectual Property. He describes his intellectual journey from initial agreement with Ayn Rand’s view of IP as an extension of property rights to the firm conclusion that any form of state-enforced intellectual property is incompatible with libertarian principles and the non-aggression principle. The discussion explores why ideas and patterns are not scarce resources capable of being owned, the critical distinction between voluntary contracts and coercive state IP, the initiation of force inherent in patent and copyright enforcement, and practical injustices caused by the current system. Kinsella and callers examine incremental invention, government-created dependency on IP, reputation rights, and how a free society could function without state-granted monopolies on ideas. The interview emphasizes that legitimate property rights arise only from homesteading scarce, rivalrous resources, not from government privileges over non-scarce information or potential future profits. Detailed Summary Introduction Jake introduces the episode and provides background on Kinsella’s monograph Against Intellectual Property, first published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies in 2001 and later released as a free book by the Mises Institute. He outlines the historical context: how most mid-20th-century freedom-oriented thinkers, heavily influenced by Ayn Rand, viewed intellectual property as a natural extension of property rights. The host contrasts this with Murray Rothbard’s partial criticisms and highlights Kinsella’s unique contribution—demonstrating that IP is a state-enforced legal convention fundamentally at odds with the non-aggression principle. How Did You Get Interested in IP? Kinsella recounts his personal path: discovering The Fountainhead in high school, studying engineering, then attending law school where he deepened his interest in libertarian theory. He describes his early sympathy with Rand’s arguments on patents and copyrights, followed by growing doubts as he studied libertarian principles more rigorously. While practicing IP law, he concluded that Rand’s theory relied on ad hoc utilitarian reasoning and ultimately lacked justification. He explains the abstract nature of his critique, the writing process in the mid-1990s, and how the rise of the internet later amplified the practical problems with IP, making his arguments more relevant. The Scarcity Question A caller challenges Kinsella’s emphasis on scarcity, arguing that while ideas themselves may not be scarce, the exclusive economic profits or advantages they generate are. Kinsella responds by grounding property rights in the Lockean homestead principle applied to scarce, rivalrous resources. He distinguishes between physical means (which are scarce and require ownership to avoid conflict) and non-scarce information or patterns that multiple people can use simultaneously without conflict. Using praxeological analysis, he explains why ownership is necessary for means of action but not for the guiding information or recipes. Concrete examples, such as razor blades and superior cotton-harvesting techniques, illustrate why potential future profits or “value” cannot legitimately be treated as ownable property. Contract Law and IP The conversation shifts to whether IP could be managed through voluntary contracts rather than state law. Kinsella agrees that private contractual arrangements for secrecy or exclusivity are fully compatible with libertarianism and anarchism. However, he stresses the vital distinction between such “private IP” and the current state-enforced “public IP,” which binds third parties who never signed any contract. He explains that the essence of patent and copyright law lies in its power to affect non-contracting parties, including through bans on reverse engineering and independent invention. Kinsella criticizes vague libertarian proposals for alternative IP systems, noting that most advocates avoid clearly defining what they support. Common Law Discussion turns to how a free society would handle exclusivity issues under c

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 054. This is my speech from the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society in Bodrum, Turkey (June 6, 2010). My topic was “Ideas are Free: The Case Against Intellectual Property,” though a better title might be something like “Ideas Are Not Property: The Libertarian IP Mistake and the Structure of Human Action.” Also podcast here: PFP064 | Stephan Kinsella, Ideas are Free: The Case Against Intellectual Property Rights (PFS 2010). The video is below; a transcript was published as a Mises Daily article: “Ideas are Free: The Case Against Intellectual Property: or, How Libertarians Went Wrong” (N.B.: there are a couple of typos in the transcript). I also participated in a Q&A Discussion Panel featuring “Hoppe, van Dun, DiLorenzo, Kinsella, Daniels, Kealey”: see PFP066 | Hoppe, Kinsella, Kealey, Van Dun, Daniels, DiLorenzo, Discussion, Q&A (PFS 2010). I discuss the conference in my post Bodrum Days and Nights: The Fifth Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society: A Partial Report. https://youtu.be/zLYXxf1bosA

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 053. Author’s Forum: Property, Freedom and Society, Austrian Scholars Conference (March 11, 2010). This is from a short speech at the Austrian Scholars Conference 2010, "Authors Forum: Property, Freedom and Society" about Property, Freedom and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Mar. 11, 2010).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 052. I was a guest recently on the Renegade Variety Hour , discussing a variety of libertarian issues with hosts Carlos Morales and Taryn Harris (May 8, 2013), including argumentation ethics and estoppel (see Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide), atheism, and related matters.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 051. This is a short, informal discussion with a good friend of mine, patent attorney Mark Gilbreth (email). A fairly a-libertarian and a-political type, we talked about some of the practical and political aspects of patent law practice. Mark is an experienced chemical engineer-specialized patent attorney (I am electrical). We met in 1998 when we both were adjunct professors at South Texas College of Law. We recorded this while walking to lunch from my house. Yes, there are traffic noises and leaf-blowers--the sounds of civilization. https://youtu.be/qe0qiIE-1fk

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 050. This is lecture 6 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Controversies.” This talk continued lecture 5, which covered "Controversies and Conundrums," such as monarchy vs. democracy, discrimination and diversity, immigration, incitement and causation (cont.), property rights, legal and logical positivism, fraud, contracts and inalienability, self-ownership, creation and the source of rights, and common libertarian misconceptions and mistakes such as scarcity vs. nonrivalry, states' rights, loser-pays system, an educational voucher system, push the button hypos, rights as a subset of morals, spam as aggression, the danger of metaphors and equivocation, working for the state, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, and fine print in contracts, federalism, left vs. rights, activism, use of courts, forgiving crimes, abandoned property, fractional reserve banking, inalienability/voluntary slavery, mutualism, relevant technological unit, the Lockean proviso, the Blockean proviso, Rothbard on copyright, Constitutional sentimentalism, Georgism, strategy, thick vs. thin, and other issues. Slides for this lecture are appended below (also used for lecture 5). For background information, links to recommended reading, and audio and slides for all six lectures, see KOL 045 | “Libertarian Controversies Lecture 1" (Mises Academy, 2011). Update: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 049. This is lecture 5 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Controversies.” This talk covered "Controversies and Conundrums," such as monarchy vs. democracy, discrimination and diversity, immigration, incitement and causation (cont.), property rights, legal and logical positivism, fraud, contracts and inalienability, self-ownership, creation and the source of rights, and common libertarian misconceptions and mistakes such as scarcity vs. nonrivalry, states' rights, loser-pays system, an educational voucher system, push the button hypos, rights as a subset of morals, spam as aggression, the danger of metaphors and equivocation, working for the state, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, and fine print in contracts, federalism, left vs. rights, activism, use of courts, forgiving crimes, abandoned property, fractional reserve banking, inalienability/voluntary slavery, mutualism, relevant technological unit, the Lockean proviso, the Blockean proviso, Rothbard on copyright, Constitutional sentimentalism, Georgism, strategy, thick vs. thin, and other issues. Slides for this lecture are appended below (also used for lecture 6). For background information, links to recommended reading, and audio and slides for all six lectures, see KOL 045 | “Libertarian Controversies Lecture 1" (Mises Academy, 2011). The remaining lectures will be released here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. Update: See KOL395 | Selling Does Not Imply Ownership, and Vice-Versa: A Dissection (PFS 2022). Update: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 048. This is lecture 4 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Controversies.” This talk covered "Misconceptions and Controversies," such as positive vs. negative obligations, contracts vs. promises, incitement and causation, and other issues. Slides for this lecture are appended below. For background information, links to recommended reading, and audio and slides for all six lectures, see KOL 045 | “Libertarian Controversies Lecture 1" (Mises Academy, 2011). The remaining lectures will be released here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. Update: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 047. This is lecture 3 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Controversies.” This talk covered "Even More Misconceptions," such as state vs. government, "limited" government, Hoppe on monarchy vs. democracy, federalism, restitution and punishment, positive obligations, and other issues. Slides for this lecture are appended below. For background information, links to recommended reading, and audio and slides for all six lectures, see KOL 045 | “Libertarian Controversies Lecture 1" (Mises Academy, 2011). The remaining lectures will be released here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. Update: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 046. This is lecture 2 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Controversies.” This talk covered more common libertarian misconceptions such as PDA jurisdiction, Big-L vs. small-l libertarianism and other misused terms, non-aggression "axiom" or principle, and other issues. Slides for this lecture are appended below. For background information, links to recommended reading, and audio and slides for all six lectures, see KOL 045 | “Libertarian Controversies Lecture 1" (Mises Academy, 2011). The remaining lectures will be released here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. Update: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 045. This is lecture 1 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Controversies.” This lecture contained an overview of basic austro-libertarian concepts and started discussing various libertarian "misconceptions," regarding the left-right spectrum, coercion and force vs. aggression, the jurisdiction of private defense agencies, and related issues. I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. This course followed on my speech "Correcting some Common Libertarian Misconceptions," from the 2011 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society (May 27-29, 2011; see KOL 044 | “Correcting some Common Libertarian Misconceptions” (PFS 2011)). That talk engendered a good deal of discussion and interest, but in the time allotted for a single speech I was able to cover only a small number of the topics I had assembled over the years. In the 6 week Mises Academy course, “Libertarian Controversies” (Sept. 19-Oct. 23, 2011), I covered these and related topics in greater depth. The course was planned for 5 weeks initially, but I added a sixth "bonus" lecture at student request. The course is discussed in my Mises Daily article “Libertarian Controversies” (Aug. 25, 2011); here are the audio and slides for all six lectures. The “suggested readings” for this lecture are appended below. Update: see also KOL185: Clarifying Libertarian Theory (Liberty.me, July 2014) KOL 044 | “Correcting some Common Libertarian Misconceptions” (PFS 2011) SUGGESTED READING MATERIAL General background readings are below; other particular links are provided in the slides for each lecture: Recommended Background Readings Kinsella, “What Libertarianism Is" Kinsella, "Libertarian Controversies" Hoppe, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism [TSC], chapters 1-2, 7 Optional Background Readings Rothbard, For A New Liberty [FaNL] and Ethics of Liberty [EoL] (both strongly recommended) Huebert, Libertarianism Today (Scribd free version; Vance’s review; Kinsella review Rockwell & Rothbard, eds., The Free Market Reader Walter Block, Defending the Undefendable Frederic Bastiat, The Law Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom Linda & Morris Tannehill, The Market for Liberty Lysander Spooner, No Treason No. VI: The Constitution of No Authority Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal Kinsella What It Means To Be an Anarcho-Capitalist How We Come To Own Ourselves Causation and Aggression Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach Inalienability and Punishment: A Reply to George Smith Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory Against Intellectual Property The Case Against IP: A Concise Guide The Trouble with Libertarian Activism Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society Summary version: Legislation and Law in a Free Society Recommended Background Readings: Other David Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom Gary Chartier, The Conscience of an Anarchist Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Bastiat, The Law; Economic Sophisms and Economic Harmonies Charles Murray, What it Means to be a Libertarian David Boaz, Libertarianism: A Primer; The Libertarian Reader: Classic and Contemporary Writings from Lao Tzu to Milton FriedmanRichard Epstein, Simple Rules for a Complex World Jeffery Miron, Libertarianism, from A to Z Optional Background Readings: Bibliographies Hoppe, Anarcho-Capitalism: An annotated bibliography Kinsella, The Greatest Libertarian Books David Gordon on Liberty Lew Rockwell on Reading for Liberty Others at LRC Bibliographies Update: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 044. This is my speech "Correcting Some Common Libertarian Misconceptions," delivered on May 28, 2011, at the Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society. The video is here, and streamed below; here is the powerpoint presentation. Re-presented as PFP076. Transcript available here. Related: KOL 045 | “Libertarian Controversies Lecture 1” (Mises Academy, 2011) KOL023 | “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society: Lecture 6: Applications Continued; Common Libertarian Mistakes (Fraud Etc.)” (Mises Academy, 2011) KOL206 | Tom Woods Show: Five Mistakes Libertarians Make KOL185: Clarifying Libertarian Theory (Liberty.me, July 2014) KOL118 | Tom Woods Show: Against Fuzzy Thinking [This speech was discussed previously on the Mises blog with extensive comments, and also on my blog] Update: Thanks to Joseph Fetz with help cleaning up the original audio file. Update: other libertarian confusions: opposing co-ownership and self-ownership: Libertarian Answer Man: Co-ownership and Ownership and Punishment of Criminals “Libertarians” Who Object to “Self-Ownership” Voluntaryist Association, THE CONTRADICTION OF MULTI-PERSON OWNERSHIP (October 24, 2022)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 043. This is my appearance on Michael Shanklin’s Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast with Michael Shanklin (April 25, 2013). We discussed a variety of issues, including: Bitcoin, the police state, legal reform (jury nullification, loser-pays rules), the morality of voting, Rothbard on copyright (for more: see Against Intellectual Property, "Contract vs. Reserved Rights" section, and Rothbard’s “High Tech ‘Crime’: A Call for Papers” (1983)), the history of patent and copyright (for more: see Karl Fogel's article The Surprising History of Copyright and The Promise of a Post-Copyright World), and other issues. Our previous discussion: KOL 025 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Intellectual Property, Ron Paul vs RonPaul.Com, Aaron Swartz, Corporatism.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 042. This is a reading of my paper "Estoppel: A New Justification for Individual Rights," which was published in Reason Papers No. 17 (Fall 1992). It was narrated by Carlos Morales on the Renegade Variety Hour podcast (April 18, 2013). This was the first of my libertarian theory works and a precursor to other articles such as "Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach," Journal of Libertarian Studies 12:1 (Spring 1996), "New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory," Journal of Libertarian Studies 12:2 (Fall 1996), and “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide,” Mises Daily (May 27, 2011) (the latter of which includes “Discourse Ethics and Liberty: A Skeletal Ebook”).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 041. This is from Episode 367 of the Bad Quaker podcast, with Ben Stone.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 040. [Update: KOL186: Great IP Debate with Baker-Kinsella] This is a discussion about IP with a fellow Austro-anarchist libertarian, Alexander Baker, who initially accepted the anti-IP argument I and others have made, but who has since moved to a type of pro-IP position. We had a few email discussions in recent months about this, but I was unable to persuade him that his approach was misguided. We decided to have a (friendly) discussion about it. Baker calls his theory "intellectual space" and has a new blog devoted to this "libertarian theory of intangible property"; he sketches his position in his post Intro to Intellectual Space. We had a very interesting, civil discussion, which is rare for discussions with IP advocates (see, e.g., KOL 038 | Debate with Robert Wenzel on Intellectual Property). Baker was honest and forthright, willing to admit what he is not yet sure about; he admitted his own bias for IP given that his career (as a musical composer) depends in part on IP protection. He admitted the burden of proof is on IP advocates, and I believe he would not disagree with me that many advocates over the years have offered weak arguments. I don't agree with Baker, in the end. His argument seems to me to be based on analogies: an idea or recipe can play a role in production "similar" to how scarce means can, and thus can be exploited, owned, etc. However, he came across to me as sincere and searching for truth, which I can appreciate. Listen and judge for yourself. https://youtu.be/2VRnZrShI6k Update: Here is a previous discussion on this topic between Baker and Stefan Molyneux:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 039. I was a guest recently on the Renegade Variety Hour (discussing intellectual property and other issues), with hosts Carlos Morales and Taryn Harris (recorded April 5, 2013, podcast April 10, 2013). I met them at the recent Liberty in the Pines conference and was happy to talk with them.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 038. [Update: see my post Wenzel the Werewolf; and Robert Wenzel, "Kinsela [sic] Constantly Insulted Me, Interrupted Me and Broke His Agreement.", Economic Policy Journal [sic] (May 5, 2014); and idem, "Is This What Kinsella Was Afraid Of?", Economic Policy Journal [sic] (May 6, 2014)] Blogger Robert Wenzel and I had a "debate" earlier today about IP, to be jointly put up on my podcast and his Economic Policy Journal "podcast" (it's on his site at Kinsella Crushed!! and Initial Report on Debate, and mentioned ahead of time several times as linked below). Bob is an Austrian libertarian (I think) blogger but has been criticizing me and Jeff Tucker's anti-IP views for a few years now (see links below), so we decided to discuss it. (( Note: I failed to record the audio at my end until 1:07:10, but my audio quality was better. So I spliced in the better second half from my recording. So starting at 1:07:10 you can hear better audio quality at my end, and no worse at Wenzel's. )) The transcript is available here. GROK SUMMARY SHOWNOTES: In this episode of the Kinsella on Liberty Podcast (KOL038), recorded on April 1, 2013, libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella engages in a contentious two-hour debate with pro-IP libertarian blogger Robert Wenzel on the legitimacy of intellectual property (IP), focusing on patents and copyrights, hosted on Wenzel’s Economic Policy Journal and Kinsella’s podcast (0:00:00-10:00). Kinsella argues that IP violates property rights by granting state-enforced monopolies over non-scarce ideas, using Austrian economics to emphasize that property rights apply only to scarce, rivalrous resources, and systematically refutes Wenzel’s circular arguments, as noted in his post-debate commentary on stephankinsella.com. Wenzel, defending IP, relies on metaphors like “stealing” information and claims ownership of a “Drudge formula,” which Kinsella dismantles as service contracts, not property transfers, while Wenzel’s EPJ posts assert he “crushed” Kinsella, focusing on Kinsella’s alleged insults and anger (10:01-1:00:00). The debate intensifies as Wenzel diverts to side issues, such as challenging Kinsella’s historical claims about Rothbard’s anti-IP stance, and avoids defining IP, prompting Kinsella to highlight Wenzel’s evasiveness and confusion between rivalry and competition, as detailed in Kinsella’s commentary (1:00:01-2:00:00). Wenzel’s EPJ posts claim Kinsella was “afraid” of losing and overly emotional, while Kinsella notes Wenzel’s own profanity and frustration, maintaining focus on IP’s economic harms, like stifling innovation, and its incompatibility with libertarian principles (2:00:01-2:23:07). The Q&A reveals Wenzel’s reliance on emotional appeals over substance, with Kinsella concluding that IP is an unjust state intervention, directing listeners to c4sif.org. Wenzel’s initial EPJ report and archived claim of victory contrast with Kinsella’s analysis, which underscores Wenzel’s failure to provide a coherent IP defense, making this episode a rigorous critique of IP’s flaws. GROK DETAILED SHOWNOTES BELOW Youtube: Backup copy: The discussion went on for over 2 hours. It went about as I expected: he tried to dwell on side points, he refused to—was unable to—even attempt to define IP much less provide a coherent justification for it. He repeatedly engaged in question-begging: calling using information you learn from others "stealing," which presupposes that there is some owned thing that is stolen. He started out with several bizarre, off-point attacks: for example challenging my claim in my 2001 piece Against Intellectual Property that Rothbard was one of the original libertarian opponents of IP. The entire criticism by Wenzel is bizarre because whether or not I am right in listing Rothbard as an opponent of patent and copyright has nothing to do with whether IP is justified. Further, later in the paper I have an extensive section dealing with Rothbard's attempt to come up with some kind of contractual scheme that emulated some aspects of IP, which he confusingly calls "copyright." Some libertarians, like Wenzel, apparently think Rothbard did support copyright (though Wenzel repeatedly equivocates on whether he is talking about state copyright or Rothbard's private "copyright" scheme), or patent, or something in between, and others say he didn't. For example David Gordon writing on LewRockwell.com, in Sam Konkin and Libertarian Theory, observes: ... anti-IP views were very much in the air thirty years ago: Wendy McElroy stands out especially in my mind as a forceful and effective critic of IP. Even earlier, Rothbard had in Man, Economy, and State (1962) favored the replacement of the state system of patents and copyrights with contractual arrangements, freely negotiated. (If one moves outside modern libertarianism, Benjamin Tucker rejected IP

Update: Libertarian and Lockean Creationism: Creation As a Source of Wealth, not Property Rights; Hayek’s “Fund of Experience” A Recurring Fallacy: “IP is a Purer Form of Property than Material Resources” Related: Isaiah Berlin on Locke, Karl Marx and the Labor Theory of Value Locke, Smith, Marx; the Labor Theory of Property and the Labor Theory of Value; and Rothbard, Gordon, and Intellectual Property KOL037 | Locke’s Big Mistake: How the Labor Theory of Property Ruined Political Theory Rothbard on the Main Fallacy of our Time: Marx’s Labor Theory of Value Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 037. [Transcript.] I spoke last weekend at the "Liberty in the Pines" (facebook event) conference at Stephen F. Austin State University, in Nacogdoches, Texas. (See “Locke’s Big Mistake: How the Labor Theory of Property Ruined Economics and Political Theory,” Liberty in the Pines Conference (March 2013).) Sponsored by the Young Americans for Liberty chapter and the Charles Koch Foundation, this one-day event brought together liberty-lovers of all stripes from surrounding areas. My speech was "Locke’s Big Mistake: How the Labor Theory of Property Ruined Political Theory." Stefan Molyneux and Jeff Tucker appeared and delivered speeches as well (with Jeff's inspiring keynote resulting in a resounding standing ovation). Walter Block conducted an "Ask a Libertarian" Q&A session (remotely), and relative newcomer Jessica Hughes delivered a surprisingly radical and resounding speech on "The Constitution of Faux Authority." Update: See Liberty in the Pines Roundup. This podcast episode includes my speech and Q&A (about 54 minutes) plus the panel Q&A (about another 50 minutes). The panel Q&A touched on issues like peaceful parenting, spanking, and so on. Not to toot my own horn, but I know I have a lot of a/v material out there, so I do believe this speech of mine is one of the most important I've ever done. Grok shownotes: In this lecture from the Libertarian Papers Audio Series, recorded circa 2010, titled “Locke’s Big Mistake: How the Labor Theory of Property Ruined Political Theory,” Stephan Kinsella critiques John Locke’s labor theory of property, arguing it introduced a metaphorical and imprecise framework that has distorted political and property rights theory (0:00-5:09). Kinsella, a libertarian patent attorney, contrasts Locke’s idea—that mixing labor with unowned resources creates property rights—with the libertarian homesteading principle, which emphasizes first use or appropriation without requiring labor (5:10-15:14). He contends that Locke’s labor metaphor fosters confusion, notably contributing to the flawed concept of intellectual property (IP), which wrongly treats non-scarce ideas as ownable, and connects this to broader errors like the labor theory of value that influenced Marxism (15:15-25:24). Kinsella’s analysis highlights how imprecise language, such as “owning labor,” has led to significant theoretical missteps. Kinsella further explores the consequences of Locke’s labor theory, illustrating how it underpins misguided arguments for IP by equating mental labor with physical labor, thus justifying monopolies over ideas (25:25-35:34). He clarifies that property rights arise from scarcity and first use, not labor, using examples like homesteading land versus creating a poem, and critiques related metaphors like “selling labor” in contracts, which he reframes as conditional title transfers (35:35-45:44). In the final segment, Kinsella advocates for a first-use-based property theory to eliminate IP and align with libertarian principles, addressing objections like voluntary slavery and emphasizing clear language to avoid metaphorical traps (45:45-55:54). He concludes by rejecting attempts to tie Locke’s theory to IP, urging libertarians to abandon labor-based property notions for intellectual freedom and market efficiency (55:55-56:05). This lecture is a rigorous critique of a foundational philosophical error, relevant to liberty and property rights debates. Grok detailed summary below. Update: Several favorable comments: e.g. "It is a shame how few views this has. I use this video often to help libertarians understand the trap of "self ownership" and I am so glad, now years ago, you fixed this for me in our interview", "Stephan, this talk is gold. Sharing.", "This was really helpful. I appreciate and enjoy Kinsella's focus on using language precisely." Update: See Stephen Decker's report on the event. Update: See also Hoppe on Property Rights in Physical Integrity vs Value, discussing International News Service v. Associated Press, 248 U.S. 215, 246 (1918), where the Supreme Court recognized a quasi-property right in the fruits of one’s labor, what is sometimes called the “sweat of the brow” doctrine (a doctrine later rejected in the copyright context in Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Ser

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 036. I was a last-minute guest last week for the Rothbardian Circle (substituting for Dan D'Amico), a Miami-based discussion group, for their event "Introduction to Free Markets/Libertarian Theory" (Mar. 20, 2013). We discussed a variety of issues, mostly in a Q&A format, including the essentials of libertarian property theory, Lockean homesteading, Rothbard's idea of the "relevant technological unit," the labor theory of property, intellectual property, and other issues. The event was reported in the article Republicans and Libertarians team up for the Rothbardian Circle.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 035. This is from my Antiwar Interview: Kinsella on Bill of Rights, Intellectual Property by host Scott Horton (Feb. 11, 2010). We discussed "the federal government’s appropriation of the Bill of Rights – through the 14th Amendment – to regulate state powers, the debate about whether current lawlessness can rightfully be blamed on deviation from the beneficent Constitution or if the problem lies in the deeply flawed document itself and why ideas can’t be property." For more on the latter, see the C4SIF Resources page. For more on constitutional sentimentalism and related issues, see “Thumbs Down on the Fourth of July” (and posts linked therein) and On Constitutional Sentimentalism. Antiwar Radio: Stephan Kinsella *** Antiwar Radio: Stephan Kinsella Posted by Scott in February 11th, 2010 No Comments Yet Posted in: Uncategorized Tags: Antiwar Radio, Scott-Horton, Stephan Kinsella Stephan Kinsella, fellow at the Mises Institute and author of the book Against Intellectual Property [.pdf], discusses the federal government’s appropriation of the Bill of Rights – through the 14th Amendment – to regulate state powers, the debate about whether current lawlessness can rightfully be blamed on deviation from the beneficent Constitution or if the problem lies in the deeply flawed document itself and why ideas can’t be property. // < ![CDATA[ // < ![CDATA[ pp_flashembed( 'powerpress_player_4654', {src: 'http://www.scotthortonshow.com/wp-content/plugins/powerpress/FlowPlayerClassic.swf', width: 320, height: 24, wmode: 'transparent' }, {config: { autoPlay: false, autoBuffering: false, initialScale: 'scale', showFullScreenButton: false, showMenu: false, videoFile: 'http://scotthorton.org/radio/10_02_11_kinsella.mp3', loop: false, autoRewind: true } } ); // ]]>Podcast: Play in new window | Download (5.5MB) (local copy)