6

Some libertarians oppose patents and copyrights in principle, see Kinsella's manifesto Against Intellectual Property. A common view is that due to its reproducibility (e.g. "theft" does not deprive the owner of the use of his/her creation or invention) "intellectual property" lacks a crucial feature of being "property". The alternative interpretation is of a ...


3

The freedom in free speech is freedom from restrictions imposed by the state. Now what freedom from restrictions by the state could "free software" refer to? It can only be the existing intellectual property regime, copyright. But the GPL depends on the existence of copyright law. It's not just a license that creates a situation which would arise ...


2

There is a lot of radical criticism of “intellectual property” which makes arguments similar to your thoughts. Take a look at No Law by David Lange & H. Jefferson Powell Against Intellectual Monopoly by Michele Boldrin & David K. Levine Copyright of fictional characters, which is what your example is about, is probably the most ill-justified aspect ...


2

The ethical arguments in favour of intellectual property are relatively straightforward. The most compelling in the modern world is the Utilitarian argument that if the owners of ideas (artistic or otherwise) were not assured of a greater reward for the public release of these ideas than those simply copying them, then they would be less likely to release ...


1

To the extent that knowledge is property at all, knowledge is community property. It is built on preceding knowledge that the community has developed, and its only use is to expand the knowledge of the community. 'Private' knowledge does not exist, for the same reasons that private languages do not exist; it's senseless even to talk about it. Of course, a ...


1

The question has several incorrect presuppositions. While it is true that knowledge seems to fall in the category of "abstract object", and is therefore arguably non-physical, this is no obstacle to property rights. This is because "rights", "property" and "law" are also all abstract objects. To even have the discussion be relevant, one must presuppose ...


1

I can't resist to make two general remarks: The principle "to enjoy the fruits of one's talent and labor" is a meritocratic principle. If Libertarianism is about meritocracy, Libertarians could also argue for anti-discrimination laws, state grants for gifted students, extremely high inheritance taxes, etc. but Libertarians don't seem to do that. To argue ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible