4 ms·

This seems like classic libertarian confusion about where "property" comes from. > As we oppose all government intervention in the marketplace, we favor the re

by notJim 5y ago

This seems like classic libertarian confusion about where "property" comes from. > As we oppose all government intervention in the marketplace, we favor the repeal of intellectual property laws. Disputes between inventors, creators, authors, artists, businesses, and other such entities should be resolved without government intervention. IP does not exist without government intervention. Government intervenes to create IP. This is true for real property as well, but at least with real property, you could form an army and defend your property that way without a government. Since IP is so easily transmissible, and often must be transmitted to be useful, this would be very challenging. If you write some source code, intending it to be proprietary (for your operating system, for example), and I obtain it somehow, you'd be screwed under this system. I guess you could call this "resolving the dispute without government intervention" in the sense that the resolution is me telling you to pound sand, but I don't think any capitalist system would find that satisfactory.

Analemma_ 5y ago
A true libertarian would respond that in Libertopia, IP rights are enforced by the owners themselves, at gunpoint. i.e. if you steal someone else's IP you can expect an unfriendly visit from a private militia. But they would concede we're a little ways out from that point and we have to go one step at a time.
- ulzeraj 5y ago
  As far as I know a true libertarian wouldn't care about IP because a piece of code or song can be copied infinitely with little effort therefore isn't scarce like property or an object. I think the fact that you can pretty much download every Austrian economic book for free from the Mises Institute website makes this clear. Note: I don't want to discuss politics. I don't care if you think its wrong or you don't like left or wing wing libertarians if that's a thing. I'm just stating what I know. Please keep your opinions about "the one true anarchist" to yourself.
  - mcguire 5y ago
    Fortunately (in many ways), economists are not required to make a living from the proceeds of their writing. Do you happen to know of a libertarian economist who has specifically come out against property rights, and who has a book available from the Mises Institute? I might feel the urge to create a book this weekend.
- notJim 5y ago
  So the utopian vision is that whoever has the bigger or better army gets the rewards?
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  you are conflating libertarians with anarcho-capitalists. Libertarians see a purpose and function to the government, while the latter does not. There are areas where the political philosophies blend and overlap, but they are distinct.
Supermancho 5y ago
> If you write some source code, intending it to be proprietary (for your operating system, for example), and I obtain it somehow, you'd be screwed under this system. Securing that only you can use some arbitrary machine instructions under IP law is an abomination, so I'm ok with this.
- notJim 5y ago
  Sure, maybe you'd be into it, but the thousands (?) of companies making money off the current system would not be. Being that we're talking about a capitalist system, that seems like something that needs to reckoned with. It goes beyond computer stuff too, of course. Let's say you write a hit song and I hear it and manage to release my version first, so I reap all the profits. Under this libertarian utopia, I guess you're supposed to just rob me at gunpoint to get "your" money back?
  - Supermancho 5y ago
    > companies making money off the current system would not be. Same thing was probably said when there was talk of banning cocaine from foodstuffs. Corporatism rarely pushes moral (or stable) principles.
heavyset_go 5y ago
Many right-libertarians fight against the idea of the state, but ignore that their economic system of choice, and their basis for property rights, comes from the state itself. Some of them recognize this, and then propose that private entities take on the responsibilities and bodies of the state, but envision another state with accountability to only shareholders or the market, and not the people. Some follow the logical conclusion and advocate for a minimal state needed to enforce property rights and contracts, and so they envision a state similar the ones we have now, but without welfare. I find that to be an interesting take on what they mean by liberty. > If you write some source code, intending it to be proprietary (for your operating system, for example), and I obtain it somehow, you'd be screwed under this system. I guess you could call this "resolving the dispute without government intervention" in the sense that the resolution is me telling you to pound sand, but I don't think any capitalist system would find that satisfactory. Imagine computing in such a market. It would prioritize cryptographically secure application DRM, application distribution systems that complied with that app DRM, systems that only allowed approved software to run and systems with tight integration with HSMs/TPMs. The biggest difference in such a world compared to ours would be that general purpose computing would hardly exist, and personal computing would consist of locked down thin clients and purpose-built devices. It wouldn't be much different than what iPhone and iPad users are already accustomed to and what Microsoft, Apple and Google are all trying to bring to personal computing in the coming years.
- maverick-iceman 5y ago
  > Many right-libertarians fight against the idea of state, but ignore that their economic system of choice, and their basis for property rights, comes from the state itself. It doesn't. According to them it comes from the right to bear arms, so in theory you'd go out and about and explore, then you'd find a nice , unclaimed piece of land and settle there. Once progress sort of catches up and the human community reaches the perimeter of your land, then you have your guns to protect your land, your family and the house you built on that land from people who want to take it from you.
- mcguire 5y ago
  "Imagine computing in such a market. It would prioritize cryptographically secure application DRM, application distribution systems that complied with that app DRM, systems that only allowed approved software to run and systems with tight integration with HSMs/TPMs." I'm in if it includes ramming the heads of a Commodore 1541 floppy drive against the limit switches to read ersatz tracks for the copy protection information so that it sounds like a small machine gun. (I'm nostalgic.) :-)

by notJim 5y ago

Analemma_ 5y ago

A true libertarian would respond that in Libertopia, IP rights are enforced by the owners themselves, at gunpoint. i.e. if you steal someone else's IP you can expect an unfriendly visit from a private militia. But they would concede we're a little ways out from that point and we have to go one step at a time.

ulzeraj 5y ago
As far as I know a true libertarian wouldn't care about IP because a piece of code or song can be copied infinitely with little effort therefore isn't scarce like property or an object. I think the fact that you can pretty much download every Austrian economic book for free from the Mises Institute website makes this clear. Note: I don't want to discuss politics. I don't care if you think its wrong or you don't like left or wing wing libertarians if that's a thing. I'm just stating what I know. Please keep your opinions about "the one true anarchist" to yourself.
- mcguire 5y ago
  Fortunately (in many ways), economists are not required to make a living from the proceeds of their writing. Do you happen to know of a libertarian economist who has specifically come out against property rights, and who has a book available from the Mises Institute? I might feel the urge to create a book this weekend.
notJim 5y ago
So the utopian vision is that whoever has the bigger or better army gets the rewards?
s1artibartfast 5y ago
you are conflating libertarians with anarcho-capitalists. Libertarians see a purpose and function to the government, while the latter does not. There are areas where the political philosophies blend and overlap, but they are distinct.

Supermancho 5y ago

> If you write some source code, intending it to be proprietary (for your operating system, for example), and I obtain it somehow, you'd be screwed under this system. Securing that only you can use some arbitrary machine instructions under IP law is an abomination, so I'm ok with this.

notJim 5y ago
Sure, maybe you'd be into it, but the thousands (?) of companies making money off the current system would not be. Being that we're talking about a capitalist system, that seems like something that needs to reckoned with. It goes beyond computer stuff too, of course. Let's say you write a hit song and I hear it and manage to release my version first, so I reap all the profits. Under this libertarian utopia, I guess you're supposed to just rob me at gunpoint to get "your" money back?
- Supermancho 5y ago
  > companies making money off the current system would not be. Same thing was probably said when there was talk of banning cocaine from foodstuffs. Corporatism rarely pushes moral (or stable) principles.

heavyset_go 5y ago

Many right-libertarians fight against the idea of the state, but ignore that their economic system of choice, and their basis for property rights, comes from the state itself. Some of them recognize this, and then propose that private entities take on the responsibilities and bodies of the state, but envision another state with accountability to only shareholders or the market, and not the people. Some follow the logical conclusion and advocate for a minimal state needed to enforce property rights and contracts, and so they envision a state similar the ones we have now, but without welfare. I find that to be an interesting take on what they mean by liberty. > If you write some source code, intending it to be proprietary (for your operating system, for example), and I obtain it somehow, you'd be screwed under this system. I guess you could call this "resolving the dispute without government intervention" in the sense that the resolution is me telling you to pound sand, but I don't think any capitalist system would find that satisfactory. Imagine computing in such a market. It would prioritize cryptographically secure application DRM, application distribution systems that complied with that app DRM, systems that only allowed approved software to run and systems with tight integration with HSMs/TPMs. The biggest difference in such a world compared to ours would be that general purpose computing would hardly exist, and personal computing would consist of locked down thin clients and purpose-built devices. It wouldn't be much different than what iPhone and iPad users are already accustomed to and what Microsoft, Apple and Google are all trying to bring to personal computing in the coming years.

maverick-iceman 5y ago
> Many right-libertarians fight against the idea of state, but ignore that their economic system of choice, and their basis for property rights, comes from the state itself. It doesn't. According to them it comes from the right to bear arms, so in theory you'd go out and about and explore, then you'd find a nice , unclaimed piece of land and settle there. Once progress sort of catches up and the human community reaches the perimeter of your land, then you have your guns to protect your land, your family and the house you built on that land from people who want to take it from you.
mcguire 5y ago
"Imagine computing in such a market. It would prioritize cryptographically secure application DRM, application distribution systems that complied with that app DRM, systems that only allowed approved software to run and systems with tight integration with HSMs/TPMs." I'm in if it includes ramming the heads of a Commodore 1541 floppy drive against the limit switches to read ersatz tracks for the copy protection information so that it sounds like a small machine gun. (I'm nostalgic.) :-)