Anti-IPR


Many people who disagree with the principles of holding exclusive rights to a piece of intellectual property disagree for different reasons.

**Intellectual Property and the Anti-Intellectual-Property Movement**  In a world with an abundant amount of support for the term Intellectual Property, and the types of intellectual property protection laws that exist under it (trademarks, patents and copyrights), there is also a strong level of opposition among different groups around the world. The main argument made against intellectual-property-restrictive laws is simply that **restricting the use of an idea that can be replicated easily inhibits the use of something by others**. This is usually typified as a **//utilitarian// ** argument. There is also a utilitarian argument against this theory however, which argues that protection provides incentives for growth. Other arguments against intellectual property rights **restrictive laws** are **completely based in morals**. Stephen Kinsella describes his view as a “**principled, libertarian, property rights view**” (Kinsella, “Against Intellectual Property”), the main principal of which is that individuals and certain entities logically do not actually deserve the “intellectual” fruits of their labor. One main group protesting intellectual property restrictive laws seems to oppose them on both of these grounds, but mostly a utilitarian argument, is a student-led movement known as **freeculture.org**. In their **“manifesto”** they describe their plan as one “**to build a bottom-up, participatory structure to society and culture, rather than a top-down, closed, proprietary structure”**. Like many others who now lend more support to this movement, they believe the new age of technology is important in considering a shift towards anti-intellectual-property legislation. “With the Internet and other advances,” they say, “**the technology exists for a new paradigm of creation, one where anyone can be an artist, and anyone can succeed, based not on their industry connections, but on their merit.”** In other words, they believe that it is so easy to copy works now, that there is new ability to spread information rapidly—and in today’s day and age, more people would be able to make use of that than ever before. They back up that statement that they “won’t allow the content industry to cling to obsolete modes of distribution through bad legislation,” implying that the industry’s practices of turning profits are less warranted, if at all, than the ability of the average person to share and use this information easily. In his book, //Against Intellectual Property// , Stephen Kinsella argues against patents stating, **“the distinction between creation and discovery is not clearcut or rigorous**” (16) due merely to the nature of patents. In the United States, it is illegal for one to patent a //natural law.// Inventions which can be used to do something in a more efficient way however, are patented. However, he argues “**Einstein’s ‘discovery’ of the relation E=mc** **2 ****, once known by others, allows them to manipulate matter in a more efficient way**,” (16) comparing him to an inventor and continues saying, “Without Einstein’s, or the inventor’s, efforts, others would have been //ignorant// <span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">of certain causal laws, of ways matter can be manipulated and utilized.” (16) But if Einstein’s law is like an invention, how is it on a moral scale is it to patent something which allows one to make use of a natural scientific law which contains ideas in its use that are just as true and natural as the original law itself? <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">Hans-Hermann Hoppe argues the anti-intellectual property movement in his book, <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">//A Theory on Socialism and Capitalism// <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">, stating that the economic reasons to protect individual property rights are not nearly as necessary for intellectual ideas because there is no scarcity. He states “**[Only] because a conflict over goods exists is there even a problem of formulating moral laws; insofar as goods are superabundant (‘free’ goods), __no conflict over the use of goods is possible and no action-coordination is needed__**__.”__ (235). One group which many people turn to and does not deal with whether or not entities should be able to retain rights to a work, but merely allows people to copyright for free and publish their goods online, making their idea superabundant, and free for all to use non-commercially as they wish, is the Creative Commons. They run the website creativecommons.org and allow for free licensing of many sorts from everywhere to music, literature, information, art, and many other aspects of culture. Creative Commons is often accepted as helping lead the free culture movement as anyone can contribute to it and will not need to legislate to allow for progress of the free culture idea.

<span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">Works cited for this page: <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">"» Manifesto." <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">__FreeCulture.org - Students for Free Culture__ <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">. Freeculture.org. 06 May 2009 <http://freeculture.org/manifesto/>. <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">Kinsella, Stephen. "Against Intellectual Property." <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">__Journal of Libertarian Studies__ <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;"> 2nd ser. 15 (2001): 16-16. <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">__Ludwig von Mises Institute__ <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">. Ludwig von Mises Institute. 6 May 2009 <http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_1.pdf>. <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">Hoppe, Hans-Hermann. <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">__A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism__ <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">. Kluwer, 1989. <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">Kinsella, Stephen. "The Growing Anti-IP Movement -." <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">__Mises Economics Blog__ <span style="font-family: Times New Roman,serif;">. 13 July 2006. Ludwig von Mises Institute. 06 May 2009 <http://blog.mises.org/archives/005314.asp>.