Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 271.This is my appearance on Let's Talk ETC! #87 (June 24, 2019), with host Dr. Christian Seberino. From his shownotes: Stephan Kinsella is a Houston patent lawyer and libertarian advocate. He joins me for an informative discussion about libertarianism, anarcho-capitalism and related blockchain legal issues. Topics addressed include how blockchain technologies impact privacy, tax collection, copyrights, patents, obscenity laws and more.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 270.This is my second appearance on The Corbett Report (Ep. 1453, 25 June 2019), with host James Corbett (from Japan):Interview 1453 – Stephan Kinsella on Law Without the State Stephan Kinsella joins us today to discuss the concept of law without the state. Is law and order possible without a state? What would that look like? And just what is “the law,” anyway? Find out more in this fascinating conversation on law, history, philosophy and anarchy.Related:What It Means To Be an Anarcho-Capitalist, LewRockwell.com (Jan. 20, 2004) Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian Approach (Feb. 3, 2009) Hoppe, Anarcho-Capitalism: An annotated bibliography, LewRockwell.com, December 31, 2001 KOL144 | Corbett Report Radio (2012)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 269.My old friend Jack Criss, former libertarian AM radio talk show host from the 1980s and now a business journalist and publisher, throws his hat into the podcast ring. He interviewed me today. His episode page is here.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 268.I was a guest on Episode 39 of the excellent podcast The Bob Murphy Show, discussing "Law Without the State, and the Illegitimacy of IP (Intellectual Property)". A few people have told me this particular discussion of IP was one of my best--thorough and systematic. No doubt aided by Bob's excellent prompting, questions, and guidance.Bob and I had planned to also discuss argumentation ethics, but the discussion of IP ran longer than we expected so we'll save AE for next time.From Bob's show notes: Bob talks with Stephan Kinsella about the basis of libertarian law, and how we could have justice without a coercive State. They then discuss Stephan’s pathbreaking work making the case that property must be in tangible things, rendering “intellectual property” an incoherent and dangerous concept.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 267.I was a guest today on Sal Mayweather's "The Agora" podcast, ep. 48 (Soundcloud version below). From his shownotes: We discussed Craig's copyright application of the Bitcoin White Paper and whether they lend any credence to his claim of being Satoshi Nakamoto. Does a copyright application imply that CSW is actually Satoshi? Stephan also breaks down some of the torts Craig has filed against against various individuals who have said he isn't Satoshi and/or referred to him as a fraud. Can he use the courts to force individuals to recognize him as Satoshi? This is a great opportunity to learn the standard libertarian position on IP, the difference between a copyright and a patent & how it all applies to current crypto-community from the world's leading expert!

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 266.This is my appearance in Episode 36 of the Did You Know Crypto Podcast, with host Dustin. We talked "about the possibility of using patents as an attack vector on Bitcoin." As Dustin summarized in his show notes:Stephan and I talk about…What is a Patent? Differences in EU/US & China Why is it so “hallowed” Open Source Software and patents What is a “Patent Troll” Craig Wright’s patents Can Bitcoin developers be sued?NOTES:Stephan on Twitter Stephan’s website History of Patents Paris Convention Patent cooperation treaty Current (2019) US /China Tarriff dispute Craig Wright v. Stephan Kinsella debate Tom Woods w/Stephan Kinsella – Ep 225 “Patents & Liberty” Tom Woods w/Stephan Kinsella – “Libertarianism & Intellectual Property” Article on Nchain Hiring Patent Lawyer

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 265.This is my conversation with Jordan Head, who expressed some disagreement or confusion about my Against IP book on a Twitter thread; I offered to discuss with him, as I often do, and he took me up on it and consented to my recording it and posting it. His main hangup was my emphasis on "scarcity" and so he was thinking time was a scarce resource, so it's being "stolen" if others copy your products, etc. I think we made good progress. We briefly discussed a few unrelated issues, like Bitcoin maximalism.Related:KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender, Jul. 25, 2017And:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 264.I appeared today on the Disenthrall.me Youtube channel, host Patrick Smith, to discuss the trademark issues between Tim Pool and his company media Subverse, and StudioFOW which has a popular crowdsourced porn video game coming out also called Subverse. We touched a bit on bitcoin ownership, patent and copyright, defamation law, and trademark law, and related matters.Related links:Tim Pool talks Subverse, Studio FOW, and Trademarks StudioFOW "Subverse" Has Forced Me To Retain A Lawyer Over My Trademark Of The Same Name Subverse porn game kickstarter How to Improve Patent, Copyright, and Trademark Law Trademark versus Copyright and Patent, or: Is All IP Evil? The Patent, Copyright, Trademark, and Trade Secret Horror Files

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 263.This is my short portion of the panel presentation "The Significance of Hans-Hermann Hoppe," from the 2019 Austrian Economics Research Conference (AERC), at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, on the occasion of Professor Hoppe's 70th birth year. The entire panel presentation, plus my notes, and a link to a longer talk on similar themes, are below.Related: KOL259 | “How To Think About Property”, New Hampshire Liberty Forum 2019“Hoppe on Property Rights” Panel: The Significance of Hans-Hermann Hoppe Auburn, Alabama • Mises Institute March 23 2019 Stephan Kinsella Kinsella Law Practice, Libertarian Papers, C4SIF.org NOTESCame across Hoppe’s writing in law school, his 1988 Liberty article “The Ultimate Justification of the Private Property Ethic.” Eventually met Hans at a conference in 1994, where I also met David Gordon, Rothbard, Walter Block, Lew, and others Hans’s contributions in a large number of fields have influenced me and many others: argumentation ethics; various aspects of praxeological economics; method and epistemology; a critique of logical positivism; democracy; immigration; and various cultural analyses.Helped change my mind about a large number of particular matters, such as the US Constitution, natural rights, and so onEventually led to Guido and I editing a Festschrift in 2009Presented here 10 years ago Including a large number of contributors including all of the panelists here today I delivered a 6 week Mises Academy course in 2011 on “The Social Theory of Hoppe”I’m going to focus on his views on property rights, which has greatly influenced my own ideasA more in depth talk on this last month at New Hampshire Liberty Forum, “How to Think About Property Rights”, on my podcast feedLaid out very plainly and concisely in Chapters 1 and 2 of A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism (1989)Only 18 pages—bears re-reading and careful study“Next to the concept of action, property is the most basic category in the social sciences. As a matter of fact, all other concepts to be introduced in this chapter—aggression, contract, capitalism and socialism—are definable in terms of property: aggression being aggression against property, contract being a nonaggressive relationship between property owners, socialism being an institutionalized policy of aggression against property, and capitalism being an institutionalized policy of the recognition of property and contractualism.” He lays out the “natural” position on property rights, and distinguishes it from property rights, the normative position.Natural position is that each actor owns his body Any scarce resource is owned by the person who first appropriated it, or who acquired it from a previous owner by contract Property “rights” mirroring this natural position are then justified with his argumentation ethics, which has been very influential and also controversial in the libertarian world Echoed in Mises, Socialism: “the sociological and juristic concepts of ownership are different.”Key to this analysis is recognizing the role of scarcity, which is inherent in human action, and which socially gives rise to the possibility of interpersonal conflict and thus the necessity for property norms to make conflict free interaction (cooperation) possible. Hans anchors his analysis in a Misesian praxeological framework, in which actors must employ scarce means or resources to achieve ends. In Mises’s praxeological view of human action, there are two distinct but essential components of human action: scarce resources, and knowledge.Actors employ scarce resources, guided by their knowledge The use of resources is essential for all actors, even CrusoeGives rise to the “natural” position on property (what Mises would call “sociological” ownership)In society,

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 262.This is a followup to my episode KOL261 | Venture Stories Podcast Debating Austrian Economics, Libertarianism, and Bitcoin with Noah Smith. I recorded some of my impressions after the show was concluded, making observations about how it went, and so on. Listen at our own peril!

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 261.This is my appearance on the Venture Stories Podcast by Village Global, April 6 episode, hosted by Erik Torenberg: A Comparison of Austrian and Keynesian Economics with Noah Smith, Parker Thompson and Stephan Kinsella. It ended up being a bit of a debate with the other guest, Noah Smith of Bloomberg. This was a bit of an interesting episode, as I explain in the informal "bonus" episode KOL262. We ended up discussing/debating a variety of issues, such as: Austrian economics and praxeology, the business cycle, bitcoin, libertarianism, the federal reserve, anarcho-capitalism and related.By the time we started the podcast I had forgotten it was not exactly for an already-libertarian or Austrian audience, and in fact the host seemed at first (off-air) to think I was the Irish economic journalist Stephen Kinsella (see Stephen Kinsella’s I am Not), and I had forgotten it was a debate and that Smith would be taking positions opposed to Austrianism and libertarianism. My performance was a bit subpar, but I did the best I could to present Austrian views even though I'm not a professional economist.From the show notes: On this episode Erik is joined by Stephan Kinsella (@NSKinsella), libertarian writer and patent attorney, Noah Smith (@Noahpinion), Bloomberg opinion writer, and Parker Thompson (@pt), partner at AngelList.In a spirited debate, the three of them discuss the relative merits of Austrian economics vs. Keynesian economics.They start out by defining the primary schools of economic thought and explaining where each of the guests sits on the spectrum of economic thinking. They talk about the value of empiricism when it comes to economics and whether economic theories can be derived from first principles.They discuss inflation and whether centralized control of the money supply leads to better economic outcomes, as well as how one can determine these things in the messy real world. They also touch on a number of other topics, including whether it would be a good thing to get rid of the FDA and pharmaceutical patents, whether antitrust law is “unethical,” and whether the patent system is a net positive for society. Embedded:Listen to "A Comparison of Austrian and Keynesian Economics with Noah Smith, Parker Thompson and Stephan Kinsella" on Spreaker.Local copy.Related:Milton Friedman, Essays in Positive Economics Karl Fogel, The Surprising History of Copyright and The Promise of a Post-Copyright World (see Youtube) KOL 038 | Debate with Robert Wenzel on Intellectual Property In response to one of Smith's comments about the origin of copyright, see Karl Fogel: "The first copyright law was a 1556 censorship statute in England. It granted the Company of Stationers, a London guild, exclusive rights to own and run printing presses. Company members registered books under their own name, not the author's name, and these registrations could be transferred or sold only to other Company members. In exchange for their government-granted monopoly on the book trade, the Stationers aided the government's censors, by controlling what was printed, and by searching out illegal presses and books — they even had the right to burn unauthorized books and destroy presses. They were, in effect, a private, for-profit information police force." Smith also claimed Robert Lucas and indeed many (most?) economists were for abolition of patents. I would love to see proof of this. Smith also seemed to deny that it's accepted in economics that minimum wage laws cause unemployment or that free trade is generally beneficial. Hunh? Smith seems to think that minimum wage might be justified if it only harms a few people but benefits most, without seeming to realize that the people that minimum wage laws harm are generally the very people the law purports to help: the least skilled and poor. Robert P. Murphy, The Depression You've Never Heard Of: 1920-1921

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 260.Libertarian Party Chair Nick Sarwark and I discuss a potpourri of libertarian issues, such as minarchy vs. anarchy, libertarian "centralism" and the Fourteenth Amendment, and applications to abortion, gay (same sex) marriage, civil asset forfeiture, and the like.Related links:Timbs vs. Indiana (2019)--recent Supreme Court civil asset forfeiture case Supreme Court rules against highway robbery through asset forfeiture Another neo-confederate, xenophobic racist… Healy on States’ Rights and Libertarian Centralists; Healy versus Bolick and the Institute for Justice The Libertarian Case Against the Fourteenth Amendment The Embarrassing Fawning over the Criminal State by Regime Libertarians The Unique American Federal Government Various Kinsella posts criticizing "libertarian centralism"

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 259.This is my main presentation at New Hampshire Liberty Forum, Feb. 8, 2019. Recorded on my iPhone. I'll upload a higher quality version later, if it becomes available.My Powerpoint that I used is embedded below:Background:KOL 037 | Locke’s Big Mistake: How the Labor Theory of Property Ruined Political Theory A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability Rothbard on the “Original Sin” in Land Titles: 1969 vs. 1974 (Nov. 5, 2014) “What Libertarianism Is”, see esp. n. 25 and accompanying text, regarding tracing title, in a property dispute, back to a common author (ancestor in title).Bonus: Below is my 30 minute (or so) appearance on the Vin Armani and Dave Butler (of Vin and Dave's Destination Unknown podcast) livestream of the Free State Project's New Hampshire Liberty Forum, Day 1 -- we discussed government versus the state, intellectual property, and related issues.Rewind a bit to enjoy the cool "New Hampshire" song

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 258.This is my debate at New Hampshire Liberty Forum, Feb. 7, 2019—really more of a roundtable discussion of immigration policy from a libertarian perspective. The other panelist was Daniel Garza, President of the LIBRE Initiative, and the moderator was Jeremy Kaufman. Some listeners may be surprised at my pro-immigration comments.Recorded on my iPhone. I'll upload a higher quality version later, if it becomes available.Related links:I’m Pro-Immigration and Pro-Open Borders Switzerland, Immigration, Hoppe, Raico, Callahan KOL160 | Bad Quaker on IP, Hoppe, and Immigration Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s “Immigration And Libertarianism” at Lew Rockwell My article Simple Libertarian Argument Against Unrestricted Immigration and Open Borders

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 257.I appeared recently on Peter Mac's show for the first time in several years. We talked about a variety of topics: education, law school, anarchy, careers, libertarian activism, and so on. This is Part 3 of 3.Related:Past, Present and Future: Survival Stories of Lawyers New Publisher, Co-Editor for my Legal Treatise, and how I got started with legal publishingPrevious appearances on Peter's show:KOL 027 | The Peter Mac Show (2009, discussing IP) KOL057 | Guest on The Peter Mac Show: “Capitalism,” Anarchy, IP and other topics (2010) KOL128 | “The Peter Mac Show,” discussing the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) (2012)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 256.I appeared recently on Peter Mac's show for the first time in several years. We talked about a variety of topics: education, law school, anarchy, careers, libertarian activism, and so on. This is Part 2 of 3.Related:Past, Present and Future: Survival Stories of Lawyers New Publisher, Co-Editor for my Legal Treatise, and how I got started with legal publishingPrevious appearances on Peter's show:KOL 027 | The Peter Mac Show (2009, discussing IP) KOL057 | Guest on The Peter Mac Show: “Capitalism,” Anarchy, IP and other topics (2010) KOL128 | “The Peter Mac Show,” discussing the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) (2012)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 255.I appeared recently on Peter Mac's show for the first time in several years. We talked about a variety of topics: education, law school, anarchy, careers, libertarian activism, and so on. This is Part 1 of 3.Related:Past, Present and Future: Survival Stories of Lawyers New Publisher, Co-Editor for my Legal Treatise, and how I got started with legal publishingPrevious appearances on Peter's show:KOL 027 | The Peter Mac Show (2009, discussing IP) KOL057 | Guest on The Peter Mac Show: “Capitalism,” Anarchy, IP and other topics (2010) KOL128 | “The Peter Mac Show,” discussing the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) (2012)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 254.From TomWoods Ep. 1304 How I Got into Harvard. I interviewed Tom about this and related questions since my 15 year old son is nearing college age and I was curious. From Tom's shownotes: Stephan Kinsella, the libertarian theorist and author of Against Intellectual Property, asked me the other day about my college admission experience. We are each the parent of a tenth grader, so the topic of college comes up in our households. I didn’t think I had much interesting to say about it, but we decided he would in effect host this episode and ask me questions. The resulting conversation turned out to be great!Read the original article at TomWoods.com. http://tomwoods.com/ep-1304-how-i-got-into-harvard/

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 253.I spoke today on “A Libertarian’s Case Against Intellectual Property,” at the Federalist Society, University of Berkeley-California. It was well-organized and there was a perceptive and interesting critical commentary by Professor Talha Syed.This is the audio I recorded on my iPhone; video below; line-mic'd audio here.My speaking notes pasted below.Youtube:***A Libertarian’s Case Against Intellectual Property Stephan Kinsella Kinsella Law Practice, Libertarian Papers, C4SIF.org UC-Berkeley Law School Federalist Society Oct. 11, 2018 General background: A Selection of my Best Articles and Speeches on IPIntellectual Property:Legal rights enforced by law having to do with products or creations of the mind, the intellect patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret semiconductor maskwork, boat hull designs, database rights, moral rights, right to one’s “likeness,” reputation rights (defamation, libel and slander, law) punishment for depicting religious figures in drawings “cultural appropriation”Why IP?Ayn Rand "Patents are the heart and core of property rights." … "Intellectual property is the most important field of law." US Commerce Dept. Study 2012 purporting to show that “intellectual Property-Intensive Industries” Contribute $5 Trillion, 40 Million Jobs to US Economy” [USPTO/Commerce Dept. Distortions: “IP Contributes $5 Trillion and 40 Million Jobs to Economy”] 2018 Nobel Laureate in Economics Paul Romer: economic growth — and the technological innovation it requires — aren't possible under perfect competition; they require some degree of monopoly power [patents] [Douglas Clement, Creation Myths: Does innovation require intellectual property rights?; Some studies: patent trolls alone cost $29 billion and total costs much higher globally ($1 Trillion/year, or more, given the “cumulative” effect of innovation) [Reducing the Cost of IP Law;Costs of the Patent System Revisited] US continually foisting higher patent and copyright protections on other countries via trade agreements and treaties, e.g. NAFTA, USMCA, TPP (“IP Imperialism”) Copyright distorts culture and threatens Internet freedom (censorship, takedown notices) [“Death by Copyright-IP Fascist Police State Acronym”; “SOPA is the Symptom, Copyright is the Disease: The SOPA Wakeup Call to Abolish Copyright,” “Where does IP Rank Among the Worst State Laws?”, “Masnick on the Horrible PROTECT IP Act: The Coming IPolice State” ]It’s important to get this issue right I’m an IP lawyer and also a libertarian since high school (1982) [How I Became A Libertarian] My IP struggle: problems with Rand, researching the issueTom Palmer, Wendy McElroy, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Mises Finally realized IP is unjustified around the time I passed the patent bar (1994) Given my knowledge of IP law I spoke and wrote more and more on this topic, even though I’m more interested in other areas of libertarian legal theoryBut I’ve found that sorting out this issue is crucial and helps sort out many other legal and policy issuesproperty and rights theory, Contract, fraud, causation and the law, and the nature and source of wealth and human prosperity [See my upcoming book, Law in a Libertarian World]The question is not "Is IP a good idea?" or "What kind of IP protection should we have?" but rather What type of laws should we have; what laws are just, or justified?Purpose of law and propertyThe question is not “is IP a good idea?” or “what kind of IP law should we have?” Garden of EdenScarcity, conflict [Hoppe, TSC, chs. 1-2; Of Private, Common, and Public Property and the Rationale for Total Privatization”] All rights are property rights [Rothard, Human Rights as Property Rights] Law is a set of rules enforcing property rights To permit conflict-free use of resources

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 252.This is my appearance on the Death to Tyrants Podcast, Episode 33: Human Rights, Property Rights and Copyrights with Stephan Kinsella (Facebook post), released Oct. 1, 2018, with host Buck Johnson. From the Shownotes: One of my favorite interviews to date. We get into rights, property, self ownership and the philosophy behind these things. We then move into "intellectual property" and the case against copyright and patents.*** This week I feature my interview with the brilliant Stephan Kinsella. We discuss the nature of rights as libertarians view them. We get into property rights, human rights, self ownership and why there is really no such thing as intellectual property. Stephan makes a strong case against copyrights and patents. Stephan's body of work can be found here: http://www.stephankinsella.com and here: http://c4sif.org Find us online at www.facebook.com/deathtotyrantspodcast Follow me on Twitter @buckrebel

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 251.This is my appearance on Creative Juice, by Indepreneur, Episode66: EP66: The Shocking Case For Abolishing Copyright Laws w/ Patent Attorney Stephan Kinsella, Sep 28, 2018, with host Kyle Lemaire. We talked about a variety of matters, from the nature of property rights, Rothbard's view that all human rights are property rights, Locke's labor theory of property and the Marxian labor theory of value, the history and general nature of IP rights and why IP rights are incompatible with other property rights. This was a very fast-talking, dense episode with a lot of lecturing and talking from my end, but I think we covered a lot of ground, from the foundations of law and property rights to IP law.Their shownotes: Since its beginning, the music industry has been under heavy government regulation: copyright laws control much of the economy of the music business. Today, there are many voices on the frontline arguing for the abolishment of all intellectual property, including copyright laws...Stephan Kinsella is a Patent Attorney and advocate for IP Abolishment. On this episode of Creative Juice, Circa sits down with Stephan to discuss the little-known argument against intellectual property and how it may actually be harming independent artists and creatives."This is one of my favorite episodes of Creative Juice to date - I highly advise that you learn about this topic and take part in the discussion surrounding these laws. I believe this is one of the most important things to examine in our industry!" - Kyle "Circa" Lemaire

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 250.This is the audio of my presentation to the 2018 PFS meeting on Saturday, Sept. 15, 2018. Powerpoint slides embedded below. Youtube embedded below.Related material: see material linked in the above slides, including:KOL001 | “The (State’s) Corruption of (Private) Law” (PFS 2012) International Law MOOC (Youtube) Sovereignty, International Law, and the Triumph of Anglo-American Cunning | Joseph R. Stromberg Rosalyn Higgins, Problems and Process: International Law and How We Use It (Clarendon, 1994) Mark Janis, International Law (7th Ed. 2018) Restatement (Third) of the Law, The Foreign Relations Law of the United States (1987), HeinOnline, Westlaw (not online) American Society of International Law (ASIL), Electronic Information System for International Law (EISIL)https://www.asil.org/resources/electronic-resource-guide-erg and http://www.eisil.org/ M.N. Shaw, International Law (7th Ed. 2017) Ian Brownlie (Crawford), Principles of Public International Law (1966) (8th ed., 2012)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 249.My appearance on Max Hillebrand's World Crypto Network show yesterday.Other notes:See other links at KOL191 | The Economy with Albert Lu: Can You Own Bitcoin? (1/3) My facebook post discussing ownership of Bitcoin Tom Bell: Copyright Erodes Property? Bitcoin Is Officially a Commodity, According to U.S. Regulator sd

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 248.TEMP: http://traffic.libsyn.com/livera/SLP15_-_Stephan_Kinsella.mp3From my recent appearance on Stephan Livera's bitcoin-focused podcast.SLP15 – Intellectual Property, Bitcoin, and Internet Censorship, with Stephan KinsellaStephan Kinsella, Intellectual Property lawyer, and libertarian advocate joins me in this episode to discuss:His story with bitcoin Money as Sui Generis Good The imprecise application of Lockean property theory Why you can’t own bitcoin, but it probably doesn’t make a big difference anyway The harmful effects of patents and copyright ‘Internet Censorship’ as it relates to property rights and ownership of private social media platformsStephan Kinsella links:Twitter: @nskinsella Stephan’s website: StephanKinsella.com Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom Stephan Kinsella’s podcast, Kinsella on LibertyPodcast links:Libsyn SLP15 Apple Stitcher SpotifyI really enjoyed this conversation with Stephan Kinsella, and I hope you enjoy listening to it. If you get value out of this episode, please remember to share it on your social media as that really helps expand my reach. Thanks guys.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 247.On a recent episode [July 29, 2018] of Free Talk Live, Ian and Mark discuss their disagreement over Mark's filing a DMCA (copyright) takedown of a critical YouTube video. I called in to discuss this issue and intellectual property with Mark for the July 31 episode. For the full episode, go here. The excerpt with my portion is included here.I've discussed IP and other libertarian issues on FTL before:KOL141 | FreeTalkLive: IP and SOPA (2012) KOL082 | FreeTalkLive Guest Appearance: IP (2011) FreeTalkLive/XM Extreme Talk Appearance re Intellectual Property KOL 033 | Free Talk Live Interview on Reducing IP Costs (2010)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 246.This is my appearance on the CryptoVoices podcast, Episode 43, interviewed by host Matthew Mežinskis. As indicated in the show notes (below), we discussed a variety of issues related to bitcoin, property rights, and related matters. The hosts also informed me of a recent article they had written regarding the economic classification of crypto tokens: An Economic Definition of Cryptotokens.Shownotes: Show support appreciated: 35iDYDYqRdN2x6KGcpdV2W1Hy3AjGje9oLMatthew interviews Stephan Kinsella, longtime advocate of private property and personal liberty, and expert on intellectual property law.We discuss broad-ranging issues on Bitcoin and private property. Is Bitcoin really property per se, and does anyone truly own bitcoin(s)? Also, how does the nature of intellectual property (or lack thereof) play into the open-source aspects of Bitcoin? What is Bitcoin? Is Bitcoin a digital good? Stephan shares his knowledge on the history of intellectual thought, personal liberty, and intellectual property to answer some of these questions. We discuss some current topics about the brand of Bitcoin (versus Bitcoin Cash), and if blockchain could(?) ever resolve some of the faults and friction in IP that Stephan has studied for years. Stephan is a well-read intellectual and Bitcoiners would do well to read more of his writings.Links for more info: twitter.com/NSKinsella www.stephankinsella.com/ mises.org/profile/stephan-kinsella mises.org/library/against-intellectual-property-0 mises.org/library/goods-scarce-and-nonscarce cointelegraph.com/news/pro-btc-mov…ng-lack-of-fundsFurther references:KOL191 | The Economy with Albert Lu: Can You Own Bitcoin? (1/3) KOL233 | Mises UK Podcast: Bitcoin Ownership and the Global Withering of the State for more on whether bitcoin is ownable property, see this Facebook thread KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender KOL086 | RARE Radio interview with Kurt Wallace: The War on Bitcoin KOL 043 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Bitcoin, Legal Reform, Morality of Voting, Rothbard on Copyright Tax Plan May Hurt Bitcoin, WSJ Swiss Tax Authorities Confirm that Bitcoin is VAT-free in Switzerland Tokyo court says bitcoins are not ownable FinCEN Rules Commodity-Backed Token Services are Money Transmitters Bitcoin Is Officially a Commodity, According to U.S. Regulator; Miami Judge Rules Bitcoin Is Not Money; Dismisses Money Laundering, Transmitting Charges How to handle bitcoin gains on your taxes SEC: US Securities Laws ‘May Apply’ to Token Sales Federal Judge Rules Bitcoin Is Real Money

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 245From my appearance on the Nothing Exempt podcast, Ep. 53, discussing IP with a couple of libertarian hosts. Well, co-host Nick said he was 80% libertarian and disagreed with me on IP ... but for somewhat inscrutable reasons, as I started asking him about, about 4 minutes in.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 244.From my recent appearance on the first episode of rising libertarian and media star Michael Malice's "Your Welcome" show on his new network, GaS Digital (consider subscribing--libertarian Dave Smith also has a great show on the network--I just did). I was in New York for the weekend, he was rebooting his show on a new network, so it was kismet. We discussed the basic case against intellectual property (I had to persuade Malice, an anarcho-capitalist who came into this without a lot of settled views on it), the Hoppe "toy helicopter" incident [e.g., 1, 2, 3], the infamous Robert Wenzel "debate," and a few other issues, like my recent bout with prostate cancer (yeah, he got me to go there).From the YouTube episode description: It's the first episode of "YOUR WELCOME"! Join Michael Malice as he speaks with American Intellectual Property Lawyer Stephan Kinsella on the current system of IP and how the implementation of its laws effect commerce, culture and society. From the drug industry to entertainment, the precedents set by those who govern over the laws of Intellectual Property help shape the foundation of culture as well as the economy. Listen as Michael Malice delves deep into the core of the issues and stories that effect our world today. "YOUR WELCOME". Follow the show @michaelmalice, @NSKinsella The YouTube video below will only be up for a couple weeks, I believe.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 243.From my recent appearance on the Libertarian Christians podcast, discussing (what else) IP.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 242.I was a guest last night on Punching Left, with hosts Clifton Knox and David German, discussing argumentation ethics, estoppel, covenant communities, the non-aggression principle, physical removal, Hoppe, Propertarianism, Curt Doolittle, Austin Peterson, and so on.Related material:Kinsella, Defending Argumentation Ethics The Genesis of Estoppel: My Libertarian Rights Theory Revisiting Argumentation Ethics Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide KOL228 | Argumentation Ethics – Lions of Liberty KOL218 | Argumentation Ethics – Patterson in Pursuit KOL161 | Argumentation Ethics, Estoppel, and Libertarian Rights: Adam Smith Forum, Moscow (2014) Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethics and Its Critics New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory, 12:2 Journal of Libertarian Studies: 313-26 (Fall 1996) Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach, 12:1 Journal of Libertarian Studies 51 (Spring 1996) Hans Hermann Hoppe, “On The Ethics of Argumentation” (PFS 2016) Frank van Dun, “Argumentation Ethics and The Philosophy of Freedom” KOL181 | Tom Woods Show: It Is Impossible to Argue Against Libertarianism Without Contradiction The A priori of Argumention, video introduction by Hoppe Lecture 3 of my 2011 Mises Academy course, “The Social Theory of Hoppe” (slides here) Lecture 2 of my 2011 Mises Academy course, “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society” (slides here)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 241.I was a guest yesterday (3/26/18) on Dave Smith's podcast. His description: "Talking Libertarian Legal philosophy with Stephan Kinsella. Topics include how the court systems could work without government and why intellectual property isn't real."We discussed a wide-ranging but fairly high-level array of libertarian theory issues, including how I became a libertarian, the main influencers (Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, Bastiat, Mises, Rothbard), property theory and scarcity, Hoppe's argumentation ethics, praxeology, dualism of various types, and, sigh, yes, intellectual property. Dave even worked in a funny joke about "The Man on the Moon" ... well you'll just have to see for yourself. But he stole it from Steve Martin.Good times.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 240.From Episode 23 of Cameron Talks Science.Episode 23: Patents and Paywalls: How IP Stifles Scientific Innovation: Stephan KinsellaFebruary 11, 2018Cameron EnglishThe accepted wisdom tells us that intellectual property (IP) laws encourage innovation. Without legal protection for their discoveries, scientists would have no incentive to conduct research and we would lose out on "...life-changing and life-saving new treatments that bring hope to doctors, patients, and patients' families worldwide. " That's a nice story, but my guest today says this seemingly self-evident truth is entirely incorrect. Far from fostering innovation in the sciences, patent attorney and legal scholar Stephan Kinesella argues that intellectual property hampers competition and thus stifles the discovery of new medicines and other technologies. Every year businesses waste millions of dollars in court defending their patents and divert resources away from research and development. This perverse system keeps smaller companies from out-competing established firms and severely limits consumer choice throughout the economy. Moreover, copyright protections allow major publishers to lock original scientific research behind paywalls and charge obscene prices to anyone who wants to access the content, even though much of the work is financed by taxpayers. Paradoxically, then, IP laws have allowed giant corporations and federal bureaucracies to tightly restrict the production and distribution of scientific knowledge. Listen in as Stephan and I discuss how this broken system came to be and what we can do to replace it.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 239.Monday morning phone call, from Mar. 14, 2016, talking nonsense, obsessing over trivia, such as the possible connections between and real meanings of the expressions "money talks, bullshit walks" and "walk the walk, talk the talk". And the problem with the expression "all he cares about is money." And Jeff's idea for an article. And Praeger University and Dennis Praeger. How Millennials can improve their self-esteem by working. I make fun of college students who have time to have a marijuana source (in the 80s). Facebook Live videos versus Google Hangouts. Tucker's hot tub and whether he should put lavender into it, and if he got caught he could pretend it was already there, that some guy named "Big Jim" had done it, and if they didn't believe him we could have a trial about it. Typical meandering, silly, rambling nonsense. This was one of our morning talks, and this time I tried to record it over my iphone using the "record call" option of the "Recorder" app.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 238.At Libertopia 2012, I participated in an hour-long IP panel with Charles Johnson, moderated by Butler Shaffer.For my other presentation, and for more details, see KOL236 | Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP (Libertopia 2012).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 237.At Libertopia 2012, I delivered a 45-minute talk , "Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP," the slides for which are below. I spoke for 45 minutes—well, 40, then the last 5 were taken up by a question from J. Neil Schulman—but only covered the first 25 slides. For more details, see Part 1, at KOL236 | Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP (Libertopia 2012).This podcast is Part 2, covering most of the remaining 41 issues.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 236.At Libertopia 2012, I delivered a 45-minute talk , "Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP," the slides for which are below. I spoke for 45 minutes—well, 40, then the last 5 were taken up by a question from J. Neil Schulman—but only covered the first 25 slides. I covered most of the remaining 41 in a separate recording, Part 2: KOL237.(Previously posted as here: Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP (Libertopia 2012) (Oct. 13, 2012). See also See also: There are No Good Arguments for Intellectual Property.)At Libertopia, I also participated in an hour-long IP panel with Charles Johnson, moderated by Butler Shaffer. It is presented in Part 3, KOL238 (forthcoming).Update: I thought of one more argument that I forgot to cover in the slides and talk. It is the argument made by Silas Barta that (a) some libertarians support rights in airwaves (electromagnetic spectra); but (b) if you support airwave rights you have no basis to object to rights in other nonscarce resources like inventions or patterns of information (see Why Airwaves (Electromagnetic Spectra) Are (Arguably) Property).There are several problems with this argument. First, not all libertarians support rights in EM spectra. So they are not committed to favor IP rights, even by Barta's argument.Second, even if EM spectra ought to be homesteadable, it does not mean that patterns of information ought to be. This is because EM spectra are actually scarce resources, while patterns of information are not. IP proponents typically grudgingly admit, when pressed, that EM spectra are scarce but patterns of information—knowledge—is not, but they then shift to the argument that the monopoly over information leads to a "right to exploit" the monopoly, which leads to acquisition of profit (money), which is a scarce resource. The problem with the latter maneuver is that the profit comes from money voluntarily handed over to a seller by a customer. But the customer owns his money until he chooses to spend it. No other person has any property right claim in other people's money or, thus, in any possible future income stream or profits.Third, even if support of airwave property rights were to imply some type of possible rights in information or the right-to-exploit information, it does not imply that legislated IP rights systems like patent and copyright are justified (see, e.g., Legislation and Law in a Free Society). The advocate of an IP system that is somehow compatible with EM spectra rights has the burden of making a positive obligation for this system, and specifying its details. He can't just say that IP is justified just because some of its opponents favor EM rights or are confused on the EM issue.Finally, and to complement the previous point: even if you can argue that EM rights are valid, and do somehow impinge on normal property rights in scarce resources (which I disagree with), this does not mean that "anything goes", that just any limits on property rights in scarce resources are justified (and this is a point I emphasized in the lecture—see slides 14-15, and my posts The Non-Aggression Principle as a Limit on Action, Not on Property Rights; IP and Aggression as Limits on Property Rights: How They Differ). Again, the IP proponent would need to put forth a positive argument for IP rights. It cannot be established by criticizing its critics. As an analogy: suppose someone believes conscription is justified, but also opposes rape. You cannot show that rape is justified just because some people are wrong on conscription; you cannot even show that rape is justified if conscription is justified.Another argument I sometimes hear is exemplified here: By such a viewpoint there’s nothing wrong with raiding an online bank account – how can the account holder claim to own something as arcane as electronic digits? People can’t claim to own electricity or numbers hence they can...

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 235.This is a short video produced by the Federalist Society, featuring me and IP law professor Kristen Osenga (I had met Osenga previously, as a co-panelist at an IP panel at NYU School of Law in 2011). I was pleasantly surprised that the Federalist Society was willing to give the anti-IP side a voice—more on this below. To produce this video, Osenga and I each spoke separately, before a green screen, in studios in our own cities, for about 30 minutes. The editing that boiled this down to about 5 minutes total was superbly done.From the Federalist Society's shownotes on their Facebook post: Why does the government protect patents, copyrights, and trademarks? Should it? Kristen Osenga and Stephan Kinsella explore the concept of intellectual property and debate its effect on society as a whole.Kristen Osenga, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law, and Stephan Kinsella, author of Against Intellectual Property, explore the concept of intellectual property and debate its effect on society as a whole.Differing Views:Libertarianism.org: Libertarian Views of Intellectual Property A 21st Century Copyright Office: The Conservative Case for Reform Mises Institute: The Case Against IP Law and Liberty: Why Intellectual Property Rights? A Lockean Justification The Constitutional Foundations of Intellectual Property Harvard Law: Theories of Intellectual PropertyI was pleasantly surprised that the Federalist Society was willing to give the anti-IP side a voice, given that many libertarian-related groups either outright favor IP or refuse to condemn it or to allow abolitionist voices.Since the dawn of the Internet in the mid-90s, the effects of patent and especially copyright law have become magnified and more noticeable. Thus more libertarians began to direct their attention to this issue. Gradually, scholarship emerged and the consensus began to shift over the last couple decades from an inchoate Randian pro-IP attitude, and/or apathy, to a interest in and opposition to IP law. It is safe to say that most thinking libertarians, most Austrians, anarchists, and left-libertarians, are now predominately opposed to IP. (See “The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism,” “The Four Historical Phases of IP Abolitionism”, “The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism”.)Accordingly, many libertarian groups are now explicitly anti-IP or at least are willing to host speakers and writers with this view, such as: the Mises Institute, and various Mises Institutes around the world (Sweden, Brasil, UK, etc.); the Property and Freedom Society; and others, like the IEA (see Stephen Davies' Intellectual Property Rights: Yay or Nay); the Adam Smith Forum-Russia, which had me present a sweeping case for IP abolition; and the Adam Smith Institute in London, which also has featured strong voices in opposition to IP (Adam Smith Institute: Do not feed the patent troll; Intellectual property: an unnecessary evil). FEE has featured my work and that of other IP abolitionists, like Sheldon Richman. Even the Mercatus Center has promoted strong IP reform, although not outright abolition (see, e.g., Tom Bell, What is Intellectual Privilege?).And, I've been invited to speak against IP in a number of fora, podcasts, and radio shows—PorcFest, Libertopia, Students for Liberty, FreeTalkLive, and so on. Even John Stossel's Fox show featured me and David Koepsell arguing the abolitionist side. So. This is good progress, and parallels the increasing interest in IP by libertarians and their increasing opposition to this type of law.But not all libertarian groups, sadly, recognize IP for the unjust state institution that it is. The Libertarian Party, for example, shamefully takes no stance on IP in its platform. This would be like failing to oppose chattel slavery, conscription, or the drug war in a society where these things were going on.

Debating WrightKinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 234.This is a debate on IP between me and a noted Bitcoin expert, Dr. Craig Wright, hosted and moderated by the Vin Armani show.After the debateI was in London to attend the inaugural 2018 meeting of Mises UK and to hang with my boys Lee Iglody, Jeff Barr, Doug French, and Hans Hoppe, and had challenged Wright to a debate during a few twitter run-ins (still on-going); I accepted and since I happened to be in London, Wright set it up and we did it at a local studio, with Armani moderating from Vegas.Further comments appear on my Facebook post and also on the Youtube post (below).Update [7/17/19]: I had my buddies Jeff Barr and Doug French in the room watching, and after the debate, invited Craig to drinks in the hotel bar. We had an interesting, if a bit bizarre and intense, discussion for an hour or so. But int he ensuing weeks, things between us devolved on Twitter. Wright had promise to produce "proof" of patents stimulating innovation during the debate, and apparently, like with many of his promises to produce something, never came through. I pointed that out on Twitter and he eventually ended up blocking me, as well as the podcast's host, Vin Armani, who at the time was, with Wright, a fellow BCH advocate (Vin is still a BCHer but Craig has split off again with his BSV). Of course, in the meantime, Wright has amped up his risible claims to be Satoshi and has been involved in a number of controversial issues in the bitcoin/crypto community. What a character.Also: during the debate I referred to him as Dr. Wright, since he claims to have several PhDs, but now I am not sure he has any legitimate PhDs, other perhaps than one in "theology", so I should not have called him "Dr." That was too deferential. On the other hand, he did pay for the venue and related costs, so I was being polite.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 233.This is my appearance on the Jan. 9, 2018 episode of the Mises UK Podcast, with host Andy Duncan. From his shownotes: On the fourth episode of the MisesUK.Org Podcast, Andy Duncan discusses with Stephan Kinsella the concept, theory, and practice of Bitcoin ownership, amongst other topics, which include the use of Bitcoin as money, the comparison between gold and Bitcoin, and the possible collapse of states everywhere due to the current monetary revolution which states may have been too slow to respond to, for the sake of their own existence. Youtube version:Related material: KOL191 | The Economy with Albert Lu: Can You Own Bitcoin? (1/3)What do you legally “own” with Bitcoin? Posted on November 23, 2018 by prestonbyrne -- see my comments for more on whether bitcoin is ownable property, see this Facebook thread KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender KOL086 | RARE Radio interview with Kurt Wallace: The War on Bitcoin KOL 043 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Bitcoin, Legal Reform, Morality of Voting, Rothbard on Copyright Tax Plan May Hurt Bitcoin, WSJ Swiss Tax Authorities Confirm that Bitcoin is VAT-free in Switzerland Tokyo court says bitcoins are not ownable FinCEN Rules Commodity-Backed Token Services are Money Transmitters Bitcoin Is Officially a Commodity, According to U.S. Regulator; Miami Judge Rules Bitcoin Is Not Money; Dismisses Money Laundering, Transmitting Charges How to handle bitcoin gains on your taxes SEC: US Securities Laws ‘May Apply’ to Token Sales Federal Judge Rules Bitcoin Is Real Money See other links at KOL191 | The Economy with Albert Lu: Can You Own Bitcoin? (1/3) My facebook post discussing ownership of Bitcoin Tom Bell: Copyright Erodes Property? KOL233 | Mises UK Podcast: Bitcoin Ownership and the Global Withering of the State for more on whether bitcoin is ownable property, see this Facebook thread KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender KOL086 | RARE Radio interview with Kurt Wallace: The War on Bitcoin KOL 043 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Bitcoin, Legal Reform, Morality of Voting, Rothbard on Copyright KOL249 | WCN’s Max Hillebrand: Intellectual Property and Who Owns Bitcoin

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 232.This is my appearance on Keith Knight's Youtube show "Don't Tread on Anyone" (Dec. 18, 2017), discussing a hodge-podge of issues such as the fundamentals of libertarianism, why scarcity is an important concept, Hoppe's greatest contributions, and so on. Youtube embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 231.This is my appearance on Let's Talk ETC! (Ethereum Classic) (Dec. 8, 2017), discussing the referenced topics. The audience is not really a libertarian one so I explained different approaches to libertarianism and some of my thoughts about libertarian activism, the prospects of bitcoin and other technology possibly aiding in the fight for human liberty and the battle against the state, and so on. The host was very good, the discussion very civil, and the audio quality is pretty good.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 230.This is my own audio recording of my debate on IP at the Yale Political Union (Facebook) on Tues., Dec. 5, 2017. My opponent was attorney Candice Cook. My initial argument begins at 0:04:40, followed by some Q&A, and my closing argument begins at 1:42:20. I can't say I recommend listening to the comments of others, as none of my arguments were really addressed and the arguments given are pretty incoherent—the arguments for IP were rooted in confused utilitarianism and even the arguments against IP were mostly rooted in anti-property socialistic assumptions.As expected, I lost the debate, by vote of the students, by a vote of about 2:1. Admittedly, it doesn't sound too bad to get 1/3, when not even all libertarians have the right view on IP, but it's worse than that: many of those who voted with me voted against IP for socialistic, anti-property reasons. Everyone is so confused about this topic. I knew this would be the case, I knew it would basically impossible, hopeless, to persuade mainstream left-socialistic types in a short talk of a radical position that rests upon having a sound view of property rights.So I went ahead, giving up hope on the audience, and laid out a systematic argument against IP based the nature of human action, human interaction, and property rights. A systematic, if compressed, argument, that could possibly resonate with some open-minded people someday listening to the recording via this podcast. Thus, my initial presentation was a very condensed (15-20 minutes) but very fundamental explanation of the nature of property rights and why intellectual property is totally incompatible with property rights. Even though I knew it would be a hard sell with Yale undergrads.As can be heard from the "hissing" (their version of booing) whenever anything pro-private-property or capitalistic was mentioned, and from the comments of some of the student political group leaders, there was a good deal of explicit Marxism and socialism among the student. But it was fun nonetheless and they were very civil and respectful.Video of the debate available here and embedded below.(I spoke on IP before a smaller student group back in 2014—see KOL151 | Yale Speech: Balancing Intellectual Property Rights and Civil Liberties: A Libertarian Perspective.)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 229.This is my appearance on the Ernie Hancock "Declare your Independence" show for Nov. 3, hours 2 and 3. There is a "debate"—more of a discussion really—with libertarian-ish gun-rights author Alan Korwin in the first segment.Some of Ernie's shownotes are pasted below, plus the Vimeo video versions of hours 2 and 3 are embedded below.11-03-17 -- Roy Robin - Stephan Kinsella - Alan Korwin -- (VIDEO MP3 LOADED) Roy Robin (Founder ICO Token Fund) talks about their decentralized investment platform - Stephan Kinsella (Intellectual Property Attorney) and Alan Korwin (Author; GunLaws.Com) discuss intellectual property and copyright issuesProgram Date: Friday, November 3, 2017Hour 1: Media Type: Audio • Time: 48:48 Mins and SecsHour 2: Media Type: Audio • Time: 136:0 Mins and SecsDeclare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock - Radio Host: Ernest Hancock Email: ernesthancock@cox.net Website: www.ernesthancock.comDeclare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock strives to create an understanding of the Philosophy of Liberty. Understanding is far more important than agreement -- that will come in its own time.DONATE Bitcoins Here 1PCnPViv1PENR5Qme63DKYbj19hmHQoag1Click to Subscribe To RSS Feed: (Use your browser)Click to Subscribe to this program on iTunes Store: (Podcast)Subscribe to Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock ArchivesDYI App for AndroidLRN.FM for Android and iOS! Listen Live @ LRN.fmHOUR ONEMedia Type: Audio • Time: 48:48 Mins and SecsGuests: Roy Robin Topics: ICO Token FundHour 1 - Roy Robin (Founder ICO Token Fund) talks about their decentralized investment platformHour 2 - Stephan Kinsella (Intellectual Property Attorney) and Alan Korwin (Author; GunLaws.Com) discuss intellectual property and copyright issuesHour 3 - Stephan Kinsella on intellectual property rightsCALL IN TO SHOW: 602-264-2800-30-Feature Article • Global Edition Freedom's Phoenix Declare Your Independence APP now on Google Play Donna Hancock Listen to any recent show of "Declare Your Independence" at the click of a button!November 3rd, 2017Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancockon LRN.FM / Monday - Friday9 a.m. - Noon (EST)Studio Line: 602-264-2800Hour 12017-11-03 Hour 1 Roy Robin from Ernest Hancock on Vimeo.Roy RobinWith Over 10 Years of Experience Building Teams, Building Brands and Launching Companies, Roy brings a unique background of proven leadership to the ICOT Project.Webpage: http://icotokenfund.com/go/Investment BreakdownBelow is the ICOT Foundations StrategyOne Year Hold40% of the Holdings will be invested 1/3'rd into BTC, 1/3'rd into LTC and 1/3'rd into ETH for a One Year HoldICO Investing25% of the Funds will be used for ICO investing.Market OpportunitiesThe ICOT Foundation will invest 12.5% of the fund into to profit from market opportunities such as Corrections, Hard Forks, etc.AcqusitionsThe ICOT Foundation will keep 22.5% of the fund available for ICO Acquisitions & Mergers.CHECK OUT THE ICOT TOKEN SALERound One$ 50,0005 Million Coin Hard Cap Any Unsold Tokens BURNEDSOLD OUTRound Two$ 1.8 Mil2.5 Mil Tokens at 0.25 2.5 Mil Tokens at 0.50 Any Unsold Tokens BURNEDThis Round is LiveRound Three5 Mil2.5 Mil Tokens at 0.75 1.25 Mil Tokens at $1 1.25 Mil Tokens at $1.50Upcoming RoundJoin The Token Sale!Below Are The Steps To Buy ICOT:Send Eth From ERC20 Wallet :Token Address: 0xEF333188332869D25C67CA7505a2eE9CD6B591dB Gas: 200,000Add Custom Token Information :Token Address: 0x63e7eEd4c0B1EaA2c8b21195e5255aB227fe3D2a Token: ICOT Decimals: 18

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 228.This is my appearance on Lions of Liberty, Episode 318, with host Marc Clair. We discussed Hans-Hermann Hoppe's "argumentation ethics" defense of libertarian rights, and related issues.Related:“Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide” (2011) and Supplemental Resources Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethics and Its Critics New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory, 12:2 Journal of Libertarian Studies: 313-26 (Fall 1996) Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach, 12:1 Journal of Libertarian Studies 51 (Spring 1996). Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan, Anti-state.com (Sept. 19, 2002) KOL218 | Argumentation Ethics – Patterson in Pursuit March 26, 2017 Hans Hermann Hoppe, “On The Ethics of Argumentation” (PFS 2016) Frank van Dun, “Argumentation Ethics and The Philosophy of Freedom” Kinsella, The Genesis of Estoppel: My Libertarian Rights Theory KOL161 | Argumentation Ethics, Estoppel, and Libertarian Rights: Adam Smith Forum, Moscow (2014) KOL181 | Tom Woods Show: It Is Impossible to Argue Against Libertarianism Without Contradiction The A priori of Argumention, video introduction by Hoppe Lecture 3 of my 2011 Mises Academy course, “The Social Theory of Hoppe” (slides here) Lecture 2 of my 2011 Mises Academy course, “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society” (slides here)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 227.This is my appearance on Voluntary Japan Live! with host Graham Smith. We talked about ownership of thoughts, the basics of libertarian property rights and terms like ownership, mind, brain, causation, action, property, and so on, intellectual property, the nature of contracts, and, of course, the dreaded "toy helicopter" controversy!(Brent Ancap had another post about this with additional links and with an excerpt of the video dealing only with the toy helicopter part here; video here.)From the VJ Live! shownotes on Youtube:" Streamed live 4 hours agoLibertarian IP lawyer and writer for Mises.com Stephan Kinsella joins the show tonight for a discussion on IP, ownership, and the difficult topic of the very nature of property, itself.Tonight's talk promises to be lively one, as Stephan and I do not seem to see eye-to-eye on every issue.There are many things that, I think, ought to be ironed out regarding libertarian attitudes toward IP, and the all-too-common knee jerk reactions of anarchists against things even as legitimate as voluntary terms of use contracts.Which contracts, for the record, Mr. Kinsella has stated, are indeed legitimate, if unlikely to be entered into.JOIN THE LIVE CHAT WITH YOUR QUESTIONS! SEE YOU SOON!***LINKS***Anarchyball Thread Post:https://www.facebook.com/Anarchyball/...“Information is not ownable. Information should not be property.”~Stephan Kinsella debates Chris LeRoux, 22:07https://youtu.be/wgJOeWU1Bek*** “Argumentation Ethics, Estoppel, and Libertarian Rights” Presentation (Moscow. Nov. 2, 2014) http://www.stephankinsella.com/2014/1...***Mises Wire: The relation between the non-aggression principle and property rights: a response to Division by Zer0https://mises.org/blog/relation-betwe...***Patterson in Pursuit Podcast: " https://youtu.be/M22mq4vA4Ew

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 226.This is a short interview I did while at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society, for Grosse Freiheit TV. Video embedded below. I think this is perhaps not my best performance, but some may find it of interest.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 225.This is my speech delivered earlier today at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society. Video embedded below. Slides used embedded below (or can be downloaded).The subsequent Q&A session for our panel is also embedded below (but not included in the audio RSS stream on this podcast feed).Related:Williamson Evers, “Toward a Reformulation of the Law of Contracts,” vol. 1, no. 1, J. Libertarian Stud. (1977) Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty, ch. 19: “Property Rights and the Theory of Contracts” (1982; 1998) Rothbard “Justice and Property Rights,”Property in a Humane Economy, Samuel L. Blumenfeld, ed. (1974) (online here)Also in Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature and Other Essays (1974) (online here) and later in The Logic of Action OneKinsella, “A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability,” J. Libertarian Stud. (2003) Kinsella, “Justice and Property Rights: Rothbard on Scarcity, Property, Contracts…,” The Libertarian Standard (Nov. 19, 2010) Kinsella on Liberty podcast: KOL146 | Interview of Williamson Evers on the Title-Transfer Theory of Contract KOL197 | Tom Woods Show: The Central Rothbard Contribution I Overlooked, and Why It Matters More detail in my “Libertarian Legal Theory” course, Mises Academy (2011), Lectures 3-4 (see KOL118)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 224.I was a guest on the Tom Woods show, Episode 998, today, discussing the work and theories of Hans-Hermann Hoppe. More--

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 223.I was interviewed for the Our Interesting Times podcast, by host Tim Kelly, for the Aug. 8, 2017 episode, to discuss the basic case against intellectual property law.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 222.This is my second speech at last weekend's Mises Brasil's 2017 “V Conferência de Escola Austríaca” [5th Austrian School Conference], Mises Brasil, Universidade Mackenzie, São Paulo, Brazil (May 12–13, 2017): “Intellectual Property Imperialism Versus Innovation and Freedom.” The Q&A is included even though the questions are in Portuguese; most answers should make sense given the context. This is a recording from my iPhone; video and higher quality audio will be linked later.The video is embedded here:The slides that I use are embedded below.Slides used for Mises Brasil:My original slides:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 221.This is my first speech at Mises Brasil's 2017 “V Conferência de Escola Austríaca” [5th Austrian School Conference], Mises Brasil, Universidade Mackenzie, São Paolo, Brazil (May 12–13, 2017): “State Legislation versus Law and Liberty.” The Q&A is included even though the questions are in Portugese; most answers should make sense given the context. This is a recording from my iPhone; video and higher quality audio will be linked later.The Youtube is here:The slides that I use are embedded below.Slides used for Mises Brasil:My original slides:Further resources:KOL001 | “The (State’s) Corruption of (Private) Law” (PFS 2012) KOL129 | Speech to Montessori Students: “The Story of Law: What Is Law, and Where Does it Come From?” KOL199 | Tom Woods Show: The State’s Corruption of Private Law, or We Don’t Need No Legislature “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer 1995), p. 132.1 Condensed version: Legislation and Law in a Free Society,” Mises Daily (Feb. 25, 2010) Is English Common Law Libertarian? (Powerpoint; PDF)Further reading:Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Watson, Alan, The Importance of “Nutshells” Herman, Shael, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law The Story of Law, by John M. Zane (I haven’t finished it yet but liked what read so far) (also online) Arthur Hogue, The Origins of the Common Law

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 220.This is my interview by Rod Rojas of the Future Gravy show, which focuses on bitcoin and blockchain topics. We discussed how patents harm innovation and various strategies some companies use to try to deal with the patent threat, such as patent pooling, defensive patent licensing, whether Blockstream's Patent Pledge is really a tactic that makes them a patent threat to the blockchain community, and related matters.The video is embedded below.Relevant material:Blockstream’s Defensive Patent Strategy: Patent PledgeEFF: The Defensive Patent License; Blockstream Announces Defensive Patent Strategy; Blockstream: Modified Innovator’s Patent Agreement; EFF: Blockstream Commits to Patent Nonaggression.Kinsella, The Patent Defense League and Defensive Patent Pooling ----, Do Business Without Intellectual Property ----, “Defensive Patent License” created to protect innovators from trolls; probably won’t work ----, Twitter Heroically Promises Not to Use Patents Offensively The Patent Pledge KOL220 | Future Gravy Interview about Blockstream and the Defensive Patent License Bitmex: A blockchain-specific defensive patent licence.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 219.I delivered a talk earlier today for the Houston Property Rights Association (April 28, 2017), “Property: What It Is and Isn’t,” which sets out the framework for how to view property rights in general and then finally turns to intellectual property. The main talk lasted for about the first 30 minutes; the final hour is Q&A. My speech notes (unedited and raw) are below.Property: What It Is and Isn’tStephan KinsellaKinsella Law Group, Libertarian Papers, C4SIF.orgHouston Property Rights Association · April 28, 2017ÏWhen a Great Austrian thinker was asked, “What is Best in Life?” He answered: “To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women.”Okay, that was Arnold Scharzenegger as Conan. This recognizes that conflict always possible in human life There are only so many “things” to go around, and if multiple people want it, they can fight violently over it. There can be conflict, precisely because we do not live in a world of superabundance.Garden of Eden etc. we live in a world where conflict is possibleAnother way to put this: we live in a world of scarce resourcesBetter called “rivalrous”Let’s turn to the ideas of another great Austrian thinker, Ludwig von MisesPraxeology: the logic of human action Structure of human action Humans use knowledge about the world to select, control and employ scarce resources (means of action) to change the future—to achieve endsNotice two crucial ingredients to successful human action: knowledge, and scarce resources/means.This is true of Crusoe alone on his island It is also true of man in societyIn society there is another way to handle the problem of scarce resourcesInstead of conflict, we can develop usage or ownership rules, to permit scarce resources to be used peacefully, productively, cooperatively, and without conflict This is the origin and basis of “property”. Alone, a man wants to use a thing: he uses it: he controls it, possesses it. In society, there could be two people who want the same thing, but because it is scarce only one can use it. Usage rules emerge that specify an owner of a given contestable resource.We call this system “property rights” We sometimes call the objects themselves “property”That chair is my propertyWhen you use a resource to change the world, in addition to your hands, your body, it becomes an extension of yourself.It becomes identified with the user. “Part of” the user. We might say it is a feature, or characteristic, or an aspect, of the user—or a “property” of the user. My gun, my knife, my fishing net, are how I control the world. I rely on them as I rely on my hands and my eyes.Thus we refer to owned objects as “a property of” the owner.we say he has a “proprietary interest in” the object, he is the proprietor, the owner. He has a property right in that resource.Notice earlier: can say these resources are “characteristics” or “features” or properties of a person’s identity.It would be odd to say “that chair is my characteristic” or “my feature”. Yet we are used to saying “that chair is my property” but what we mean is: a given person is the owner of that resource. A given person has a property right in that resource.A system of property rights, or law, emerges, which determines owners of various resources.Who has a property right in this thing? Who owns it? “Property does not exist because there are laws, but laws exist because there is property.” — FrédéricBastiat This is true of all legal and political systems, even socialist What distinguishes libertarianism and free market, western systems is our property allocation rules. These are:self-ownership (body-ownership), plus:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 218.This is Episode 50 of the Patterson in Pursuit podcast, where host Steve Patterson interviews me about Hans-Hermann Hoppe's argumentation ethics.[Update: He does a breakdown of our discussion in Episode 63.]Patterson's description: If we choose to argue, have we presupposed an ethical framework? Is “self-ownership” a concept that cannot coherently be doubted?To help me answer these questions, I’m joined by one of the most prominent supporters of “argumentation ethics” – the theory that says ownership is inescapable, and as soon as we choose to argue, we’re committed to a set of ethical values.Related resources:Kinsella, “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide” (2011) and Supplemental Resources Hans Hermann Hoppe, “On The Ethics of Argumentation” (PFS 2016) Kinsella, New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory Frank van Dun, "Argumentation Ethics and The Philosophy of Freedom" Kinsella, The Genesis of Estoppel: My Libertarian Rights Theory Kinsella, Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 217.This is Episode 14 of the MusicPreneur podcast, "Intellectual Property is the Bastard Child of the Gatekeepers," run by host James Newcomb. I appeared on his previous podcast, Outside the Music Box, a while back. This one is a fresh, stand-alone discussion where I lay out the case against IP fairly methodically. MusicPreneur shownotes below. See also my A Selection of my Best Articles and Speeches on IP.01/31/2017 | 0Listen to this episodePlay / pause1xIntellectual Property is the Bastard Child of the Gatekeepers (Ep. 14)0:00 0:00Intellectual Property is the Bastard Child of the Gatekeepers (Ep. 14)Download "Doing Business Without Intellectual Property!"Downloadstephankinsella.comYou're probably going to disagree with what is said in this episode. In fact, it could very well make you angry. But, as Bob Dylan said, "The times, they are a changin'."It's an issue that I've wrestled with over the years and have finally come to the conclusion that Intellectual Property (IP) is detrimental to progress and innovation. While on the surface it appears to protect the rights of content creators to profit from their content, the reality is that the only people who really profit are the "gate keepers" and those who hang out near "the gates".I've tried to take a "back door" approach with this issue before, thinking that people would somehow be persuaded to see my point of view without actually telling them my point of view. Not surprisingly, the results of that approach weren't encouraging.I've decided to just come right out and say it. Intellectual Property is Horrible The fact of the matter is that just about every way of thinking that was considered set in stone a short time ago is suddenly up for debate once again.What are the origins of IP? How did it become de facto conventional knowledge in modern society? Is it really the only legalized monopoly in existence?Enter my guest for this episode, Stephan Kinsella. He's been a patent attorney in Houston, TX for nearly 30 years. He's the author of Against Intellectual Property as well as a pamphlet titled, Doing Business Without Intellectual Property.In this discussion, we discuss why intellectual property (IP) is a hindrance to progress and innovation for musicians, and how MusicPreneur's can navigate the oftentimes confusing waters of IP.IP is not compatible with traditional view of property.World of scarcity - one person can use at a timeAustrian EconomicsMises: Human Action Act: Human has conception of where he is, what future is coming, anticipates what future is coming. Makes necessary changes... Informed by your knowledge of what's possible; tools at your disposal.Involves employment of scarce resources Guided by knowledgeImpossible to have monopoly in an idea.IP Law enforces law with use of force. Another form of redistribution of wealth.2 Rules in Acquiring PropertyFirst person to start using it - Homesteading; original appropriation Purchase materials in a legitimate exchangeHow IP came aboutPrinting press was a threat to established order Statute of Monopolies Statute of Anne created copyrightPractical Application - How can musicians maximize exposure while protecting artistic integrity?Don't have to have a copyright. Don't have to register/enforce Creative Commons Don't sign rights away to a studio SK self-publishing next bookLiberty and freedom available now that hasn't existedProfit is an unnatural thing - breeds competitors. Entrepreneurs need to be aware of how business models can be copied. Some are not viable.What does the next 10 years hold?

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 216. www.stephankinsella.com/kinsella-on-liberty-podcast/I was a guest recently on Isaac Morehouse's podcast, "Why Intellectual Property Sucks, with Stephan Kinsella" (Oct. 10, 2016), discussing intellectual property and related issues. Isaac's description below:Is intellectual property law the foundation of an innovative society? Or a racket set up to protect entrenched businesses from competition? Stephan Kinsella joins the show this week to break down intellectual property law.Stephan is a practicing patent attorney, a libertarian writer and speaker, Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom (C4SIF), and Founding and Executive Editor of Libertarian Papers.He is one of the clearest and most compelling thinkers on intellectual property law.We cover the historical context of IP law, the modern day consequences of copyright and patent monopolies, the flaws in common arguments for intellectual property laws, and more.Covered in this episode:How did Stephan become interested in intellectual property? His intellectual evolution on the topic of intellectual property What are copyright, patent, trademarks, and trade secrets? Where did the concept of intellectual property come from? Which IP laws are the most harmful? Fraud vs. Trademarks Libertarian perspectives on IP John Locke’s errors on property that affect us today Why Innovation is stronger without IP (fashion, food, football) Problems with trade secret law Copyright law that existed under common law Why IP is wrong from a deontological and consequentialist point of view How would J.K. Rowling make a living without IP? How to be principled about IP as an entrepreneur while not harming your companyLinks:www.stephankinsella.com How I Changed My Mind on Intellectual Property by Isaac Morehouse Against Intellectual Property by Stephan Kinsella (free) Do business without IP by Stephan Kinsella Episode 14: Harris Kenny on 3D Printing and a World Without Intellectual Property C4SIF.org (Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom) Ayn Rand on IP Against Intellectual Monopoly by Michele Boldrin and David Levine (Free version) The Case Against Patents by Michele Boldrin and David LevineIf you are a fan of the show, make sure to leave a review on iTunes.All episodes of the Isaac Morehouse Podcast are available on SoundCloud, iTunes, Google Play, and Stitcher.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 215. www.stephankinsella.com/kinsella-on-liberty-podcast/ I was a guest recently on the Latter-Day Liberty podcast discussing intellectual property and related issues. Host: Mat Kent.Ep. 19 Intellectual PropertyPodcast: Play in new window | DownloadHow could a true libertarian claim to be against intellectual property? Aren’t property rights central to the principles of liberty? Stephan Kinsella joins us to discuss the case against IP and why, as libertarians, we should oppose it.About the Guest:Stephan Kinsella is a practicing patent attorney, a libertarian writer and speaker, Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom (C4SIF), and Founding and Executive Editor of Libertarian Papers.Guest’s Book:Against Intellectual PropertyGuest’s Links:stephankinsella.com Libertarian Papers Center for the Study of Innovative FreedomAuthorMat KentPosted onSeptember 9, 2016

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 214. www.stephankinsella.com/kinsella-on-liberty-podcast/I was a guest on the fun and zany libertarian podcast "Johnny Rocket Launch Pad," Episode 97. They fired questions at me one after another, and I did my best to field them. The sound effects were added later.From the shownotes page: What are some things libertarians commonly get wrong? What bad habits do we fall into, with regard to philosophy and law? This week we are joined by the intellectual giant Stephan Kinsella, who brings his experience in law, and philosophy to the table. This episode exposes new ways of looking at old philosophies, and we also go into depth about intellectual property. This is an episode you cannot miss!You might even become a better libertarian.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 213. www.stephankinsella.com/kinsella-on-liberty-podcast/This is a debate between me and one Todd Lewis, hosted by Keith Preston, about self-ownership and the non-aggression principle. Lewis had participated in a decent debate with Walter Block previously, so I agreed to discuss with him, even though he was not clear where he was coming from, what his own position was, or what he hoped to prove by debunking the NAP (whenever someone is opposed to the NAP, I assume they want to justify aggression—I think I'm right). This Lewis character appears to be some kind of "Mennonite" Christian in Ohio, and claims to be a former "fusionist" (some kind of libertarian+conservative) and now some form of Christian conservative who believes in legally punishing homosexuality. I don't think he was ever really a libertarian, to be honest. He attacks a lot of strawmen, and never really responds to my coherent statement of the libertarian vision. He calls this the "Praise of Folly" "podcast" though it is not a podcast since there is no RSS feed. But I'll grant, he was far more civil and even intelligent than others I have debated, on topics like anarchy and IP, such as Jan Helfeld and Robert Wenzel, though that's admittedly a low bar.For related material see:Selected Supplementary Material for Law in a Libertarian World: Legal Foundations of a Free Society What Libertarianism Is How We Come To Own Ourselves What It Means To Be an Anarcho-Capitalist New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan (wayback version) KOL004 | Interview with Walter Block on Voluntary SlaveryWalter Block episode:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 212. www.stephankinsella.com/kinsella-on-liberty-podcast/This is my interview, mostly on various anarcho-capitalism issues, by Josh Havins, of the Lafayette County (Mississippi) Libertarian Party: Their episode: “Ask a Libertarian #8 – Stephan Kinsella – Anarcho-Capitalism” (video embedded below).For related material see:What It Means To Be an Anarcho-Capitalist The Irrelevance of the Impossibility of Anarcho-Libertarianism Question about the feasibility of anarcho/libertarianism What Libertarianism Is Selected Supplementary Material for Law in a Libertarian World: Legal Foundations of a Free Society

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 211.My interview on the Wake Up Call podcast, Episode 44: Corporations and the Corporate Form.From the shownotes page: Episode SummaryStephan Kinsella joins Adam Camac and Daniel Laguros to discuss corporations and the corporate form, common objections, and state interventions in the area.Related Articles 1. In Defense of the Corporation by Stephan Kinsella (October 27, 2005) 2. Corporate Personhood, Limited Liability, and Double Taxation by Stephan Kinsella (October 18, 2011)Books Mentioned 1. Against Intellectual Property by Stephan Kinsella 2. In Defense of the Corporation by Robert HessenRelated Interview 1. KOL170: Tom Woods Show: Are Corporations Unlibertarian? (January 24, 2015)Previous Appearance 24. The Nature of Property and Problems with Intellectual Property Laws with Stephan Kinsella (Wednesday, March 30, 2016)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 210.This is my interview, mostly on IP, by Josh Havins, of the Lafayette County (Mississippi) Libertarian Party: Their episode: "Ask a Libertarian #6 - Stephan Kinsella - Against Intellectual Property" (video embedded below).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 209.A patent litigator friend of mine in Houston, Sandeep (Sandy) Seth, and I have squabbled about intellectual property law before. So he came over to my house and we had a little conversation where I tried to find a way to get him to see why IP law should be abolished. The results were predictable. The video is embedded below.Background links:“Conversation with an author about copyright and publishing in a free society” “The Non-Aggression Principle as a Limit on Action, Not on Property Rights,” StephanKinsella.com Blog (Jan. 22, 2010) “IP and Aggression as Limits on Property Rights: How They Differ,”StephanKinsella.com Blog (Jan. 22, 2010) Discussion on Facebook “Legal Scholars: Thumbs Down on Patent and Copyright” (Oct. 23, 2012) “The Overwhelming Empirical Case Against Patent and Copyright” (Oct. 23, 2012)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 208.[Transcript available here.]A conversation about intellectual property and libertarian and property theory with my old friend J. Neil Schulman. We discussed our differing views on IP, as a result of my comments on a recent post Patrick Smith: Un-Intellectual Property. Hey, I tried my best, but we never quite saw eye to eye.For further information, see Neil's posts Human Property, The Libertarian Case for IP; and Media-Carried Property (MCP).See also the comments here to The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism and My Unfinished 30-Year-Old Debate with Wendy McElroy. For further material about Schulman’s logorights theory, see:Query for Schulman on Patents and Logorights; Kinsella v. Schulman on Logorights and IP; Schulman: “If you copy my novel, I’ll kill you”; Replies to Neil Schulman and Neil Smith re IP; Schulman: Kinsella is “the foremost enemy of property rights”; On J. Neil Schulman’s Logorights; Reply to Schulman on the State, IP, and Carson.For some related material discussed, seeClassical Liberals and Anarchists on Intellectual Property (discussing LeFevre) The Four Historical Phases of IP Abolitionism The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism (on Konkin) The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 207.A stand-alone episode recorded late at night on my iPhone—had to get it out, thinking about it was keeping me from sleeping. Audio quality is fine, though no pop filter or pro-microphone, as I just used my iPhone. Slight nasal cold leftover from snow-skiing trip altitude sickness is there, but it seems not to be too distracting.Background material:Against Intellectual Property, "IP as Contract" section Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian Approach (Feb. 3, 2009) The Problem with “Fraud”: Fraud, Threat, and Contract Breach as Types of Aggression (July 17, 2006) Stop calling patent and copyright “property”; stop calling copying “theft” and “piracy” A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability, Journal of Libertarian Studies 17, no. 2 (Spring 2003): 11-37 Reply to Van Dun: Non-Aggression and Title Transfer, Journal of Libertarian Studies, Volume 18, no. 2 (Spring 2004)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 206.I discussed various libertarian with Tom Woods on his show today, Episode 592. From Tom's show notes:Stephan Kinsella joins me to discuss negative/positive rights and obligations, “loser pays,” whether creation makes you an owner, how we can consider spam aggression, and more. Fun!Background materials for topics discussed:Spam:Why Spam is Trespass (Jan. 18, 2010) Kinsella & Tinsley, Causation and AggressionPositive rights and libertarianism:How We Come To Own Ourselves Objectivists on Positive Parental Obligations and AbortionLoser pays unlibertarian: See "Losing Patentee Pays" section of Reducing the Cost of IP Law Creation not a source of ownership:Hoppe on Property Rights in Physical Integrity vs Value Intellectual Freedom and Learning Versus Patent and Copyright “Locke on IP; Mises, Rothbard, and Rand on Creation, Production, and ‘Rearranging’,” Mises Economics Blog (Sep. 29, 2010) [updated C4SIF version, including Hoppe comments] “The Intellectual Property Quagmire, or, The Perils of Libertarian Creationism,” Austrian Scholars Conference 2008 (March 13, 2008) “Objectivist Law Prof Mossoff on Copyright; or, the Misuse of Labor, Value, and Creation Metaphors,” Mises Economics Blog (April 19, 2011) [archive version] Rand on IP, Owning "Values", and "Rearrangement Rights"Related/previous talks:KOL118 | Tom Woods Show: Against Fuzzy Thinking KOL 044 | “Correcting some Common Libertarian Misconceptions” (PFS 2011) “Libertarian Controversies” “Correcting some Common Libertarian Misconceptions,” 2011 Annual Meeting, Property and Freedom Society (May 28, 2011) [podcast here] KOL185: Clarifying Libertarian Theory (Liberty.me, July 2014)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 205.This is my Austrian AV Club Interview by Redmond Weissenberger, Director of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada, back from Aug. 25, 2012. We had a long-ranging discussion on the issue of net neutrality, and we touched on other issues as well including various ways the state impinges on Internet freedom, such as in the name of IP (SOPA, ACTA), child pornography, terrorism, online gambling, and so on.For background on some of the issues discussed, see my posts Net Neutrality Developments; Kinsella on This Week in Law discussing IP, Net Neutrality; Against Net Neutrality.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 204.From episode 087 of the Outside the Music Box podcast, "A PODCAST ABOUT PEOPLE, Centered on Music," hosted by James Newcomb [later re-podcast by Newcomb for his Trumpet Dynamics podcast, Ep. 80 Intellectual Property Overview]. In this episode of Outside the Music Box, we discuss one of the most sacred cows in life, that of Intellectual Property (IP). Stephan explains his position that IP creates confusion regarding the whole concept of property in general. He then gives practical guidance on how to survive and even thrive in this brave new world of IP in which we find ourselves.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 203.This is a Libertarianism Q&A I did using the new Facebook Mentions "Live Video" feature (from this Facebook post). I fielded a few questions on various topics, e.g. verbal threats as assault, assault and battery, causality, praxeology, etc.Background:A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights How We Come To Own Ourselves Causation and Aggression The Limits of Armchair Theorizing: The case of Threats The Problem with “Fraud”: Fraud, Threat, and Contract Breach as Types of AggressionFacebook Live Video below://Libertarian Theory Q&APosted by Stephan Kinsella on Monday, January 11, 2016

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 202.I discussed the libertarian non-aggression principle with Tom Woods on his show today, Episode 566:Ep. 566 Why Are Some Libertarians Rejecting the Nonaggression Principle? 8th January 2016It’s become fashionable in libertarian circles to ridicule the nonaggression principle. Stephan Kinsella and I speak in its defense. This one is long overdue.Column Discussed“Six Reasons Libertarians Should Reject the Non-Aggression Principle,” by Matt ZwolinskiSee also my:What Libertarianism Is Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian Approach (Feb. 3, 2009) The Limits of Armchair Theorizing: The case of Threats, Mises Blog (Jul. 27, 2006) The Problem with “Fraud”: Fraud, Threat, and Contract Breach as Types of Aggression (July 17, 2006)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 201.I was a guest today on the Mid-Life Criss podcast, episode 4, produced by my friend Jack Criss, of BAMSouth. We discussed my IP views, anarchy, and a few related matters.https://soundcloud.com/robert-dillard-689981544/mid-life-criss-show-4

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 200.I was interviewed yesterday by Steve Rose of The Anarchist Standard about a libertarian/anarchist strategy and a variety of other matters.From his description:"Stephan and I discussed his path to anarchism, the changing labels for the liberty movement, artificial intelligence, religion, world government, and prospects for the future of liberty."

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 199.I discussed legislation and law with Tom Woods on his show today, Episode 557:Ep. 557 The State’s Corruption of Private Law, or We Don’t Need No Legislature 17th December 2015 Ever since we learned in school how a bill becomes a law, we’ve absorbed the idea that it’s normal for law to be imposed from the top down. But it’s possible, and indeed the historical norm, for law to emerge in a completely different, more libertarian-friendly way. Join me for a great conversation with Stephan Kinsella!About the Guest Stephan Kinsella is a registered patent attorney, lecturer, and author. He is the Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom, Founding and Executive Editor of Libertarian Papers, and blogger at The Libertarian Standard. Special Offer Get a FREE signed and personalized Tom Woods book for yourself when you buy a loved one a subscription to LibertyClassroom.com by Christmas. Drop me a line after buying and let me know what book you’d like and where I should send it. Related Links “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society” (PDF) by Stephan Kinsella Liberty and Law (PDF), by Giovanni Sartori “The State’s Corruption of Private Law,” by Stephan Kinsella “Another Problem with Legislation: James Carter and the Field Codes,” by Stephan Kinsella Related Books Law, Legislation, and Liberty, vol. 1: Rules and Order, by F.A. Hayek Freedom and the Law, by Bruno Leoni Books by the Guest Against Intellectual Property International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution: A Practitioner’s Guide Protecting Foreign Investment Under International Law: Legal Aspects of Political RiskFor some more related posts/resources:“Legislation and Law in a Free Society,” Mises Daily (Feb. 25, 2010) “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer 1995) Another Problem with Legislation: James Carter v. the Field Codes Kinsella & Rome, Louisiana Civil Law Dictionary (Quid Pro Books, 2011) Regret: The Glory of State Law KOL001 | “The (State’s) Corruption of (Private) Law” (PFS 2012) Hayek, Law, Legislation and Liberty, vol. 1 John Hasnas, The Myth of the Rule of Law David Kelley & Roger Donway, Laissez Parler: Freedom in the Electronic Media (linked here) Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law (pdf) Shael Herman, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law Idem, The Importance of “Nutshells”, AJCL, 1994 Why Airwaves (Electromagnetic Spectra) Are (Arguably) Property

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 198.This is a discussion with Ash Navabi, an economics grad student at George Mason, who messaged me this question: Hi Stephan. I'm having a conceptual problem distinguishing IP and tangible property.In Against IP, you said that an IP right gives the IP owner "invariably transfer partial ownership of tangible property from its natural owner to innovators, inventors, and artists."But doesn't this apply to every property right? If I own a tract of land, why can't we say that if I ban you riding across it with your dirt bike, then I am claiming ownership over your dirt bike? I decided to just discuss this with him for the podcast. We ended up veering into a couple tangential issues like auctions for trade secrets in an IP-free world, and so on.Before we talked, I asked him to read:“The Non-Aggression Principle as a Limit on Action, Not on Property Rights,” StephanKinsella.com Blog (Jan. 22, 2010) “IP and Aggression as Limits on Property Rights: How They Differ,”StephanKinsella.com Blog (Jan. 22, 2010)Other materials mentioned during our discussion:Against Intellectual Property Roderick Long, Owning Ideas Means Owning People and The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property RightsThe video is streamed below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 197.I discussed Rothbardian/libertarian contract theory with Tom Woods on his show today:Ep. 547 The Central Rothbard Contribution I Overlooked, and Why It Matters3rd December 2015Stephan Kinsella explains the importance of Rothbard’s theory of contract — a point I myself did not appreciate until this episode — and contrasts it with mainstream theories, which most libertarians think are the same as their own. We need to get these fundamentals right, so listen in and learn with me!Articles Discussed “Toward a Reformulation of the Law of Contracts,” by Williamson M. Evers “A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, Inalienability,” by Stephan Kinsella Book Discussed The Ethics of Liberty, by Murray N. Rothbard For some more related posts/resources: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)] Justice and Property Rights: Rothbard on Scarcity, Property, Contracts… KOL020 | “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society: Lecture 3: Applications I: Legal Systems, Contract, Fraud” (Mises Academy, 2011) around Slide 16: slides here The Libertarian View on Fine Print, Shrinkwrap, Clickwrap KOL146 | Interview of Williamson Evers on the Title-Transfer Theory of Contract KOL004 | Interview with Walter Block on Voluntary Slavery

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 196.This is my appearance on the Jason Stapleton Program: Intellectual Property: A Libertarian Debate with Stephan Kinsella.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 195.This is my appearance on theThe 21st Century Anarchist Podcast Ep. 038: IP with Stephan Kinsella, with host Hermann Morris.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 194.This is an impromptu discussion with my wonderful parents, Norman and Patsy Kinsella, who live in Prairieville, Louisiana. We did this a couple days ago, Oct. 1, on my 50th birthday. As sometimes happens in October in Louisiana, the weather starts getting nice around that time, and so we were sitting outside on the porch and when my dad got out his ballot to vote by mail in an upcoming election, I whipped out my iPhone and did a quick interview with them about politics that I thought might be of interest to some of my followers.(N.b.: For those interested in more details on related matters, see How I Became A Libertarian (2002), later published as “Being a Libertarian” in I Chose Liberty: Autobiographies of Contemporary Libertarians.)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 193.This is my appearance on Albert Lu’s “The Economy” podcast. This is part 3 of 3. We discussed property rights, bitcoin ownership, intellectual property, and related matters.See also: KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal TenderFull video of all three parts below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 192.This is my appearance on Albert Lu’s “The Economy” podcast, Episode 2015-9-23. This is part 2 of 3. From Albert Lu's description: Your host Albert continues the discussion with patent attorney Stephan Kinsella. In the second of a three-part interview, they discuss the concept of “ownership”.Topics CoveredThe entire world is made of hardware and owned by someone Fiat money is similar to Bitcoin How property rights arise de facto vs. de jure ownership What is a “good”?Part 1 is here: KOL191 | The Economy with Albert Lu: Can You Own Bitcoin? (1/3).Part 3 will follow in due course.Full video of all 3 parts here:

This is my appearance on Albert Lu's "The Economy" podcast. This is part 1 of 3. We discussed property rights, bitcoin ownership, intellectual property, and related matters.Parts 2 and 3 to follow in due course.Relevant links:KOL233 | Mises UK Podcast: Bitcoin Ownership and the Global Withering of the State for more on whether bitcoin is ownable property, see this Facebook thread KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender KOL086 | RARE Radio interview with Kurt Wallace: The War on Bitcoin KOL 043 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Bitcoin, Legal Reform, Morality of Voting, Rothbard on Copyright Tax Plan May Hurt Bitcoin, WSJ Swiss Tax Authorities Confirm that Bitcoin is VAT-free in Switzerland Tokyo court says bitcoins are not ownable FinCEN Rules Commodity-Backed Token Services are Money Transmitters Bitcoin Is Officially a Commodity, According to U.S. Regulator; Miami Judge Rules Bitcoin Is Not Money; Dismisses Money Laundering, Transmitting Charges How to handle bitcoin gains on your taxes SEC: US Securities Laws ‘May Apply’ to Token Sales Federal Judge Rules Bitcoin Is Real Money KOL249 | WCN's Max Hillebrand: Intellectual Property and Who Owns Bitcoin What do you legally “own” with Bitcoin? Posted on November 23, 2018 by prestonbyrneAnd, from a note from Lu: Audio download (3 parts)http://powerandmarket.com/pmr-economy/vol2/v2e39-kinsella.mp3 http://powerandmarket.com/pmr-economy/vol2/v2e40-kinsella.mp3 http://powerandmarket.com/pmr-economy/vol2/v2e41-kinsella.mp3See also: KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender Video below:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 190.This is my talk “On Life without Patents and Copyright: Or, Who Would Pick The Cotton?”, delivered at the Property and Freedom Society, 10th Annual Meeting, Bodrum, Turkey (Sep. 13, 2015).Video below. This version is taken from my iPhone recording. My notes used for the speech are pasted below. Also below is a video of the Q&A panel session following the talk.Related: Do Business Without Intellectual Property (Liberty.me, 2014) (PDF).On Life without Patents and Copyright: Or, But Who Would Pick the Cotton?Stephan KinsellaKinsella Law Group, Libertarian Papers, C4SIF.orgProperty and Freedom Society, 10th Annual MeetingBodrum, Turkey (Sep. 13, 2015)A pleasure to be at PFS or, as I’m starting to think of it, the Land of Successive Hangovers Hoppe: does not do interviews because he does not like to repeat himselfSo I thank him for asking me to speak on intellectual property for the first time everMy topic: What would life without IP be like?Or: But how will people make money in an IP-free world? Subtitle: But who would pick the cotton?Questions about IP are often confused. There are at least three separate, though possibly related, issues:Should we have patent and copyright law? (A political-normative question.) Given that we do, how should people respond in today’s world? I.e., Life with patent and copyright. (practical and ethical question). What would an IP-free world look like? Life without (A prediction.)Summarize case against IPPropertarian; utilitarianAs for the second and especially third issues, the questions: Questions are not arguments and are not always sincereSometimes loaded or rhetorical But who will pick the cotton if we eliminate chattel slavery?Illegitimate (and hidden/disguised) argumentWhy do you support intellectual communism? (loaded) How many brands of cars, or toothpaste, will we have in a post-communist world? (prediction and disguised argument) But you’re an IP lawyerDidn’t realize I was so powerful—my personal choice of career has somehow changed the structure of moral reality. I guess I’m like the libertarian Beyonder or Molecule ManWe cannot deny that changing state law will have no effect.If state legislation had no effect, we would not mind them Eliminating a bad law will have effects, just as imposing a bad law will have effects So it can be reasonable to ask what effects removing a bad law will be, so long as one is not implying “and unless your answer satisfies me, we will keep the bad law in place”With that said, let’s consider the second two questions 2: how should people respond? Life with patent and copyright.Mainly a practical and ethical question Infringing IP is exclusively a prudential, not a moral, issueIf you can get away with copyright piracy or patent infringement, there is nothing whatsoever wrong with itTorrents, etc.In many fields it is difficult to avoid employing IP, given its existencePublishers will insist on the assignment or license of copyright Patents are often necessary for defensive purposes We must be careful to avoid conspicuous copyright piracy to avoid severe penalties and imprisonment Innovators and companies face the risk of being sued for patent infringement by patent trolls and large competitorsThat said, it is arguably immoral (unlibertarian) to use patent or copyright law aggressively (offensively), for example to sue an innocent person for patent or copyright infringement,or to engage in patent and copyright “trolling” But it is moral to countersue someone for patent infringement (defensive)Firms in some industries engage in patent pooling for mainly defensive purposes And many companies today try to avoid or minimize dealing with IP:

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 189.This is an interview I did a few weeks ago with English libertarian Richard Storey. We discuss the nature of libertarianism, its roots in Western Rationalism and how to defend and promote it, property rights and scarcity, the significance of Hoppe's argumentation ethics, praxeology, Misesian dualism, logical positivism, legal positivism, and related matters.Related material:What Libertarianism Is Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide Logical and Legal Positivism

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 188.I was a guest last night (Sunday night, Aug. 23, 2015) on the Free Talk Live radio show, with hosts Mark Edge and Ian Freeman, discussing the common law, legislation, restitution, and related issues.For background/related:Another Problem with Legislation: James Carter v. the Field Codes Legislation and Law in a Free Society Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian Approach The Libertarian Approach to Negligence, Tort, and Strict Liability: Wergeld and Partial Wergeld The (State’s) Corruption of (Private) Law Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 187.I appeared on Jeff Berwick's show in 2012: Kinsella on Anarchast Discussing IP, Anarcho-libertarianism, and Legislation vs. Private Law (Dec. 29, 2012): I was a guest on Jeff Berwick's Anarchast (ep. 51, 36 min), released today. We discussed anarchy and how such a society might be reached; the basis and origin of law and property rights and its relationship to libertarian principles, and implications for legislation versus law and the legitimacy of intellectual property; also, utilitarianism, legal positivism, scientism, and logical positivism. Description from the Anarchist site below. For more background on IP, see the C4SIF Resources page; on legislation vs. private law, see The (State’s) Corruption of (Private) Law.Anarchast Ep. 51 with Stephan Kinsella Jeff Berwick in Acapulco, Mexico, talks with Stephan Kinsella in Houston, TexasTopics include:- Stephan explains how he became an anarchist and some of the books that pointed him in the right direction including - The Fountainhead (http://amzn.to/VnZwSL) - Stephan is a practicing attorney that applies his legal knowledge with his libertarian philosophy - He believes a free law society will only come about if a majority of people agree in libertarian principles - Law is defined as a concrete body of rules that permits a group of people that want to be able to cooperate to be able to do so - Jeff asks if it is necessary for everyone to agree with libertarian philosophy in order to have a free society - Stephan thinks that a majority of people already have libertarian principles but have not been educated correctly in constancy - He is more optimistic that most because he sees more people not accepting central planning than in the past - Jeff thinks that there could be a backlash against free market ideas during a financial collapse where the people believe capitalism is to blame - Stephan hopes that people will slowly find the state to be irrelevant and this will bring about a free society - Jeff thinks that there will be a financial collapse that will make this transition unpredictable - Stephan is an expert in libertarian Intellectual Property theory - He explains the principles of property law - What most people think is law today is not what law would be based on in a libertarian society - Stephan explains the problem with legal and economic positivism - The proper libertarian view is to be opposed to making law through legislation - The problem with intellectual property is that you are able to use the force of the government against someone who has not aggressed against you - Stephan explains the problems with the utilitarian Intellectual property justification - The intellectual property system forces everyone to participate even if they don’t agree with itStephan is doing astounding work in libertarian legal theory you can find more in formation on his siteshttp://www.stephankinsella.com/http://c4sif.org/For more information on The Dollar Vigilante, go to http://dollarvigilante.com. For more information on Jeff Berwick’s anarchist enclave, Galt’s Gulch Chile, go to http://galtsgulchchile.com. And, for more on the anarchist enclave in Acapulco go to http://dollarvigilante.com/acacondos. Come on down and be a guest on Anarchast and live relatively free amongst other anarchists.Source: http://financialsurvivalnetwork.com/2012/12/anarchast-ep-51-with-stephan-kinsella/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=anarchast-ep-51-with-stephan-kinsella

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 186.The Great IP Debate: Stephan Kinsella vs. Alexander Baker Liberty.me (July 8, 2014). From the Liberty.me description: Intellectual property is one of the most controversial topics among libertarians. Can ideas be legitimate forms of property? Do the benefits of intellectual property laws, such as providing incentives for inventors, overcome the negatives, such as benefiting large corporations relative to newcomers in industry? Stephan Kinsella argues ideas are not and cannot be property, and that the negatives of IP easily outweigh the positives: IP amounts to a grant of government monopoly. Alexander Baker counters with a theory entitled “Intellectual Space” which argues that intangible goods (songs, movies, software, games) display all the same characteristics (homesteadable, useful, costly, scarce, rivalrous) as physical goods (bicycles, factories, diamonds), thus requiring property rights to eliminate conflict over their use.Related:KOL 040 | INTERVIEW: Alexander Baker: Discussion with a Pro-Intellectual Property Libertarian KOL 038 | Debate with Robert Wenzel on Intellectual Property KOL079 | “Federalist Society IP Debate (Ohio State)” (2011) KOL076 | IP Debate with Chris LeRoux An IP challenge for Alexander Baker (Louigi Verona) Why Intellectual Property is Not Real Property (Michael Mogren, Liberty on the Rocks—Denver) Baker's most recent ruminations on IP."Ace" Baker will never figure out IP. He keeps trying over and over again to explain what he thinks about it, and why it may be justified. Sad. My comment: "When do you think you'll finally figure this stuff out? Let me tell you--never. You are doing what I tried to do from about 1990 to 1994--I tried to find a good argument for IP. I kept stumbling. Finally, after having read and thought enough, I realized why I was unable to do this. Because, you know, IP is totally and utterly unjustified. I was young enough to admit my previous error and to change course. I fear you are too old now and determined to argue for IP no matter what. This is tendentious, and sad."

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 185.From a Liberty.me seminar from July 14, 2014. Clarifying Libertarian Theory with Stephan KinsellaEveryone seem to have an opinion about what the “correct” libertarianism is. What are its limits? What are the areas in which libertarians get bogged down in semantic arguments and minutiae, and what are the arguments that really matter? Stephan Kinsella believes that he has the answers, and will share them Monday, July 14th at 9pm EDT! Video here, also embedded below:Related:KOL 045 | “Libertarian Controversies Lecture 1″ (Mises Academy, 2011); KOL 044 | “Correcting some Common Libertarian Misconceptions” (PFS 2011)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 184.Last month I attended PorcFest 2015 and delivered this talk on intellectual property. Video version below (followed by a lower quality version shot by James Cox).I also participated in a debate on anarchy and participated in a couple of radio shows (Ernie Hancock’s Freedom Phoenix and Free Talk Live). James Cox shot some other videos as well, which are up on his channel; a few of these are also embedded below.Porcfest 2015: The Root of All Evil (official PorcFest version)Lecture: Intellectual Property is the Root of All Evil: Porcfest 2015 (James Cox version)Stephan Kinsella - Intellectual Property: The Root of All EvilSign up or log in to save this event to your list and see who's attending!TweetShareIn this talk, Kinsella explains that the most evil state policies and institutions include war, taxation, state provided education, central banking, the drug war — and intellectual property, or IP, namely patent and copyright law. In the modern age, IP's importance, and the damage it causes, have increased. Patent originated in protectionism and mercantilism, while copyright originated in censorship. In this modern age of high tech, globalization and international trade, the economic cost of patent law and its detrimental effect on innovation has gotten many times worse. Copyright limits the freedom to learn and communicate and threatens to undermine freedom on the Internet, one of the most important tools to fight against the state.Kinsella, a practicing patent attorney, argues that IP is in a sense the most insidious of the major state institutions. War, taxation, the drug war, and other state laws and institutions are obviously illiberal and rights violations. However, patent and copyright law fly under the banner of intellectual "property" rights, confusing even many anti-state libertarians, who normally support property rights. Kinsella argues that IP rights are based on a fallacious understanding of rights—namely, confusions in Locke's 'labor theory of property'—and that this error pervades and corrupts much modern thinking about the role of law and property rights and the state. The damage caused and the threat posed by IP is greater than most people realize; it is growing; and the intellectual error behind it must be exposed.SpeakersStephan Kinsella Executive Editor, Libertarian Papers Stephan Kinsella is a practicing patent attorney and a libertarian writer and speaker. He Founder and Executive Editor of Libertarian Papers, Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom (C4SIF). A former adjunct professor at South Texas College of Law, he has published numerous articles and books on IP law, international law, and the application of libertarian principles to legal topics, including Against Intellectual Property... Read More →Friday June 26, 2015 5:00pm - 5:45pm PAVILION PhilosophyAttendees (46) Attendance numbers do not account for private attendees. Get there early!

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 183.I recently attended PorcFest 2015 and participated in a debate on anarchy and other matters, plus a speech on IP as the Root of All Evil. The YouTube, filmed by James Cox, is below. The audio here was captured by my iphone.Update: From Ayn Rand in the Campground: The Atlas Society at PorcFest "During a highlight of the conference -- people had been anticipating it for weeks -- William Thomas debated Rand’s principle of minimal government with anarchist Stephen Kinsella to a packed and lively audience. The tent was full, with standing room only, and people were still spilling out of the tent. Everyone listened with rapt attention, cheered their favorite points, and hung around for hours afterward to talk and debate ideas. (See the video, here: https://goo.gl/snjmXE)Lecture: Intellectual Property is the Root of All Evil: Porcfest 2015Also:Appeared as a guest on Ernie Hancock's Freedom's Phoenix episode for 6/26/15 (in Hour 2). We discussed IP-related aspects of bitcoin, MaidSAFE, etc.). Appeared as a guest of Mark Edge on Free Talk Live, June 26, 2015 (starts at 40:28) (video is here)Other (mostly fun, social):Stephan Kinsella Meets Ernie Hancock at Porcfest 2015Stephan Kinsella Meets Adam Kokesh at Porcfest 2015Stephan Kinsella Meets Derrick J Host Of Flaming Freedom at Porcfest 2015Larken Rose, Stephan Kinsella and Daniel Rothschild Anarchy at The Rock (PorcFest 2015)This is an impromptu video shot by James Cox of some discussions with Larken Rose who was sitting under his "rock" for several days.Stephan Kinsella Chalks Porcfest 2015 K-Man StylePorcfest 2015 Talk Stephan Kinsella, Ganine Van Alst, Daniel Rothschild, Evan Isaac, Eliza SpragueFriday, June 26 • 10:30am - 11:20amAnarchism, for and against: a debateSign up or log in to save this event to your list and see who's attending!TweetShareDoes a commitment to liberty imply a commitment to anarchy, or the total elimination of government? Is a stable, anarchic system of liberty possible or desirable? David Kelley will moderate a debate on these issues between Stephan Kinsella Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom and William Thomas of The Atlas Society.ModeratorsDavid Kelley Chief Intellectual Officer, The Atlas Society David Kelley is the founder and Chief Intellectual Officer of The Atlas Society. After earning a Ph.D. in philosophy from Princeton University in 1975, he joined the philosophy department of Vassar College, where he remained until 1984. He has also taught at Brandeis University as a Visiting Lecturer. Among his books are Unrugged Individualism: The Selfish Basis of Benevolence; The Contested Legacy of Ayn Rand; The Evidence of the Senses, a... Read More →SpeakersStephan Kinsella Executive Editor, Libertarian Papers Stephan Kinsella is a practicing patent attorney and a libertarian writer and speaker. He Founder and Executive Editor of Libertarian Papers, Director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom (C4SIF). A former adjunct professor at South Texas College of Law, he has published numerous articles and books on IP law, international law, and the application of libertarian principles to legal topics, including Against Intellectual Property... Read More →William Thomas Director of Programs, The Atlas Society - The Center for Objectivism William R Thomas is Director of Programs at The Atlas Society. He has a Master's Degree in Economics from the University of Michigan, and has served as Lecturer in Economics there and at the University at Albany. He has been a lecturer at Gadjah Mada University in Indonesia and conducted research under the auspices of the People's University of China. He is a graduate of Oberlin College, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. Thomas is the... Read More →

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

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

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

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

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

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 177.This is the sixth of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011; discussed on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course). The first lecture may be found in KOL172.The slides for the first lecture of this course are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail here. All slides and “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172.Lecture 6: THE FUTURE; INTEGRATING IP THEORY WITH AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS AND LIBERTARIAN THEORY; PROPOSED REFORMS; IMAGINING A POST-IP WORLD; THE FUTURE OF OPEN VS. CLOSEDSUGGESTED READING MATERIALSee the notes for KOL172.***Some of the video files for these lectures were preserved. They can be found here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 176.This is the fifth of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011; discussed on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course). I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. The first lecture may be found in KOL172.The slides for the first lecture of this course are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail here. All slides and “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172.Lecture 5: PROPERTY, SCARCITY, AND IDEAS; EXAMINING RIGHTS-BASED ARGUMENTS FOR IPSUGGESTED READING MATERIALSee the notes for KOL172.Some of the video files for these lectures were preserved. They can be found here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 175.This is the fourth of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011; discussed on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course). I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. The first lecture may be found in KOL172.The slides for the first lecture of this course are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail here. All slides and “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172.Lecture 4: IP STATUTES AND TREATIES; OVERVIEW OF JUSTIFICTIONS FOR IP; PROPERTY, SCARCITY AND IDEAS; RIGHTS-BASED ARGUMENTS FOR IP: CREATION AS A SOURCE OF RIGHTSSUGGESTED READING MATERIALSee the notes for KOL172.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 174.This is the third of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011; discussed on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course). I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. The first lecture may be found in KOL172.The slides for the first lecture of this course are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail here. All slides and “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172.Lecture 3: EXAMINING THE UTILITARIAN CASE FOR IPSUGGESTED READING MATERIALSee the notes for KOL172.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 173.This is the second of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011; discussed on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course). I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days. The first lecture may be found in KOL172.The slides for the first lecture of this course are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail here. All slides and “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172.Lecture 2: OVERVIEW OF JUSTIFICATIONS FOR IP; PROPERTY, SCARCITY, AND IDEASSUGGESTED READING MATERIALSee the notes for KOL172.Some of the video files for these lectures were preserved. They can be found here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 172.This is the first of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011; discussed on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course). I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days.The slides for the first lecture of this course are provided below, as are the “suggested readings” for the course. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail here. I also include in this first of the 6 podcasts for this series an introductory video for the course followed by the audio and slides for all 6 lectures. The "suggested readings" for each lecture are appended to the end of this post. I'll include individual audio and slides for the following podcasts in this series.Introductory video from the Mises Blog post Kinsella Can Be Your Professor:Lecture 1: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN HISTORYLecture 2: OVERVIEW OF JUSTIFICATIONS FOR IP; PROPERTY, SCARCITY, AND IDEASLecture 3: EXAMINING THE UTILITARIAN CASE FOR IPLecture 4: IP STATUTES AND TREATIES; OVERVIEW OF JUSTIFICTIONS FOR IP; PROPERTY, SCARCITY AND IDEAS; RIGHTS-BASED ARGUMENTS FOR IP: CREATION AS A SOURCE OF RIGHTSLecture 5: PROPERTY, SCARCITY, AND IDEAS; EXAMINING RIGHTS-BASED ARGUMENTS FOR IPLecture 6: THE FUTURE; INTEGRATING IP THEORY WITH AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS AND LIBERTARIAN THEORY; PROPOSED REFORMS; IMAGINING A POST-IP WORLD; THE FUTURE OF OPEN VS. CLOSEDSUGGESTED READING MATERIALThe "suggested readings" for each lecture are appended below. The links were internal Mises Academy links so would not work here, and I had no time to add individual links for all of them, but until I find time to code in the links, most of these materials can be found on stephankinsella.com/publications, c4sif.org/resources, mises.org, hanshoppe.com/publications, or on Wikipedia or by google search. (If there is a particular link you cannot find online, email me or add to the comments, and I'll try to find it and update the post with that link.)Main Texts Kinsella, Against Intellectual Property (AIP) Boldrin & Levine, Against Intellectual Monopoly (AIM)LECTURE 1: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN HISTORYSUGGESTED READINGSLegal Background:AIP, pp. 9-14Optional Copyright Basics (US Copyright Office) URL Copyright overview (LII/Cornell) URL Patent law overview (LII/Cornell) URL Patent introductory information (Ladas & Parry) URL US Patent law information (USPTO) URLHistory:AIM, ch. 2, pp. 33-35 ("World Before Copyright" section); ch. 3, pp. 48-51 ("World Without Patent" section).AIP, pp. 9-14 Statute of Anne (Wikipedia) URL Stationers' Company (Wikipedia) URL History of patent law (Wikipedia) URL Letters Patent (Wikipedia) URL Statute of Monopolies 1624 (Wikipedia) URLOptional Krummenacker, Are "Intellectual Property Rights" Justified? (Historical Origins section) Palmer, Intellectual Property: A Non-Posnerian Law and Economics Approach (pp. 264-71) A Brief History of the Patent Law of the United States (Ladas & Parry)LECTURE 2: OVERVIEW OF JUSTIFICATIONS FOR IP; PROPERTY, SCARCITY, AND IDEASSUGGESTED READINGSLaw Defamation (Wikipedia)--beginning to Section 5 only Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution PolicyHistory Machlup, "An Economic Review of the Patent System" [pp. 2-5]Optional Machlup & Penrose, “The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century,” [pp. 2-6, et pass.] Frumkin,

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 171.I was a guest yesterday (Feb. 6, 2015) on Albert Lu's "The Economy" podcast, discussing my recent appearance on Stossel [Stossel Show on Intellectual Property (Fox Business Channel, Jan. 30, 2015)]. The full episode is here; the portion including only our interview is included in this podcast feed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 161.This was my (remotely delivered) presentation at the 6th Adam Smith Forum, Moscow, Russia (Nov. 2, 2014):From the programme: "Entitled "Argumentation Ethics, Estoppel, and Libertarian Rights," Kinsella discusses the nature and definition of libertarianism and surveys different arguments and theories for its particular conception of rights and politics, including natural rights, consequentialist, and utilitarian approaches. He concludes with an overview of two more recent and unique approaches to justifying libertarian rights, the "argumentation ethics" approach of Austrian economist and political philosopher Hans-Hermann Hoppe, and Kinsella's own "estoppel" theory of rights." This is my second speech at the Adam Smith Forum; the first was “Why Intellectual Property is not Genuine Property,” 3rd Adam Smith Forum, Moscow, Russia (Nov. 12, 2011), also via remote video.I did not prepare a new powerpoint but I drew heavily on the one linked here, and included below. Here is the transcript.The main resources I drew on, which I mentioned in the lecture, include:New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights How We Come To Own OurselvesThese issued were also discussed in further detail in previous Mises Academy courses:KOL155 | “The Social Theory of Hoppe: Lecture 3: Libertarian Rights and Argumentation Ethics” (the slides for this lecture are appended below; links for“suggested readings” for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153) KOL108 | “Why ‘Intellectual Property’ is not Genuine Property,” Adam Smith Forum, Moscow (2011)SLIDES FOR THE SOCIAL THEORY OF HOPPE: LECTURE 3: LIBERTARIAN RIGHTS AND ARGUMENTATION ETHICS

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

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 159.This is my seminar, Practical Solutions to the IP Trap, delivered to Liberty.me members on May 19, 2014, based on my monograph Do Business Without Intellectual Property (Liberty.me, 2014). This talk provides an overview of IP and the issues faced by people in their careers and lives and offers suggestions as to how to ethically and practically navigate challenges posed by the existing IP system.Youtube version below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 158.This is the final of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course “The Social Theory of Hoppe.”The slides for this lecture are appended below; links for“suggested readings” for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153.LECTURE 6: POLITICAL ISSUES AND APPLICATIONS; HOPPE Q&AUpdate: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 157.This is the fifth of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course “The Social Theory of Hoppe.” I’ll release the final lecture here in the podcast feed shortly.The slides for this lecture are appended below; links for“suggested readings” for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153.LECTURE 5: ECONOMIC ISSUES AND APPLICATIONSUpdate: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 156.This is the fourth of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course “The Social Theory of Hoppe.” I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days.The slides for this lecture are appended below; links for“suggested readings” for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153.Lecture 4: EPISTEMOLOGY, METHODOLOGY AND DUALISM; KNOWLEDGE, CERTAINTY, LOGICAL POSITIVISMUpdate: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 155.This is the third of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "The Social Theory of Hoppe." I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days.The slides for this lecture are appended below; links for "suggested readings" for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153.LECTURE 3: LIBERTARIAN RIGHTS AND ARGUMENTATION ETHICSUpdate: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 154.This is the second of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course “The Social Theory of Hoppe.” I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days.The slides for this lecture are appended below; links for“suggested readings” for the course are included in the podcast post for the first lecture, episode 153.LECTURE 2: TYPES OF SOCIALISM AND THE ORIGIN OF THE STATEUpdate: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 153.This is the first of 6 lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course “The Social Theory of Hoppe.” I’ll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast feed in upcoming days.The slides for the first lecture of the Social Theory of Hoppe course are provided below, as are the “suggested readings” for the course.As general background I suggest:Kinsella, “Foreword,” in Hans-Hermann Hoppe, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism (Laissez Faire Books ebook edition, 2013) Kinsella, “Afterword,” in Hans-Hermann Hoppe, The Great Fiction: Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline (Laissez Faire Books, 2012) “Introduction,” with Jörg Guido Hülsmann, in Hülsmann & Kinsella, eds., Property, Freedom, and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Mises Institute, 2009) (published as “Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe,” Mises Daily, Aug. 7, 2009)LECTURE 1: PROPERTY FOUNDATIONSFor slides for all six lectures, plus extensive hyperlinked suggested reading material, see this Libertarian Standard post.SUGGESTED READING MATERIALThe “suggested readings” for each lecture are appended below. Links, where available, are provided; most of these materials can also be found on stephankinsella.com/publications, c4sif.org/resources, mises.org, hanshoppe.com/publications, or on Wikipedia or by google search.LECTURE 1: PROPERTY FOUNDATIONSChapters 1 & 2, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism [TSC]LECTURE 2: TYPES OF SOCIALISM AND THE ORIGIN OF THE STATETSC Chs. 3-6 De-Socialization in a United Germany “Banking, Nation States and International Politics: A Sociological Reconstruction of the Present Economic Order” (ch. 3 of The Economics and Ethics of Private Property [EEPP])LECTURE 3: LIBERTARIAN RIGHTS AND ARGUMENTATION ETHICSSUGGESTED READINGSKinsella, “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide” Hoppe: EEPP, chapter 11, “From the Economics of Laissez Faire to the Ethics of Libertarianism,” ch. 12. “The Justice of Economic Efficiency,” and “Appendix: Four Critical Replies”OPTIONAL READINGSKinsella, “New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory” “On the Ultimate Justification of the Ethics of Private Property,” by Hoppe “Beyond Is and Ought,” by Murray N. Rothard “Hoppephobia,” by Rothbard “Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan,” by Stephan Kinsella “Argumentation Ethics and The Philosophy of Freedom,” by Frank Van Dun “Hülsmann on Argumentation Ethics,” by KinsellaLECTURE 4: EPISTEMOLOGY, METHODOLOGY AND DUALISM; KNOWLEDGE, CERTAINTY, LOGICAL POSITIVISMSuggested ReadingsTSC, Pages 118-144 and 152-155 Economic Science and the Austrian Method Is Research Based on Causal Scientific Principles Possible in the Social Sciences? (ch. 10 of EEPP) In Defense of Extreme Rationalism: Thoughts on Donald McCloskey’s The Rhetoric of Economics [ch. 16 of The Great Fiction]Optional ReadingsChapter 9. “On Praxeology and the Praxeological Foundation of Epistemology”; ch. 14. “Austrian Rationalism in the Age of the Decline of Positivism” (from EEPP) On Certainty and Uncertainty, Or: How Rational Can Our Expectations Be? [ch. 14, The Great Fiction] The Science of Human Action (lecture)LECTURE 5: ECONOMIC ISSUES AND APPLICATIONSSuggested ReadingsHoppe on Property Rights in Physical Integrity vs Value Hoppe on Liberal Economies and War Hoppe: Marx was “Essentially Correct” Capitalist Production and The Problem of Monopoly (from TSC) Fallacies of the Public Goods Theory & the Production of Security Verstehen and the Role of Economics in Forecasting, or: If You’re so Rich, Why Aren’t You Smart? “Chicago Diversions” in "The Ethics and Economics of Private Property" Kinsella, “Knowledge vs. Calculation”Optional ReadingsThe Misesian Case against Keynes The Limits of Numerical Probability: Frank H.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 146.Today I had a discussion with Williamson Evers, about his pathbreaking 1977 article Toward a Reformulation of the Law of Contracts, which was the first article ever published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies (Evers's other JLS articles).This article was relied on heavily by Rothbard, in ch. 19 of The Ethics of Liberty, "Property Rights and the Theory of Contracts." I discuss this piece in detail in my 2003 JLS article A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability, and I also discuss it in my post Justice and Property Rights: Rothbard on Scarcity, Property, Contracts….A fascinating interview. We discussed the genesis of this important theory and related matters. I appreciate greatly Dr. Evers taking time to discuss this matter with me.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 139.Albert Lu interviewed me for his Power and Market podcast, posted July 29, 2014. Unlike most interviews, we talked about education, career choices, and related matters. This is an edited version of a longer interview. The longer one can be obtained by requesting access here.Lu's description for the longer interview (which will be posted anon): Interview HighlightsIn this interview, Stephan speaks directly to prospective law students, internet entrepreneurs, and technology capitalists about the practice of law and the dangerous world of intellectual property. We also took time to discuss his own academic career and his multiple transitions from engineering student, to lawyer, to proprietor and independent scholar.This was a fun interview and reminds me of reason I began this project in the first place.

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

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

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

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

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 134. This is my appearance as a Guest panelist on This Week in Law, Episode 267 (July 18, 2014). Brief description: “Are patent trolls losing ground? Dish Anywhere in the Aereo aftermath, FCC gets 1 million comments on U.S. net neutrality debate and more!" Once again, the hosts and the other guest were congenial to my radical anti-IP views, and the other guest, law professor Harry Surden, basically acknowledged that there is no clear empirical evidence in favor of the patent system. (BTW the title of the show stemmed from my use of the fancy SAT word eleemosynary—it's used in Louisiana law on occasion, which is how I know, but it is obscure, but a fun word, so I had to drop it in the conversation... Some of my previous posts related to some of the topics discussed:Net Neutrality Developments Against Net Neutrality A Libertarian Take on Net Neutrality Costs of the Patent System Revisited Yet Another Study Finds Patents Do Not Encourage Innovation Patent trolls as mafioso (and that’s a compliment)My previous two appearances on TWiL were: KOL104 | This Week in Law 97: God Creates. We Patent. IP, Net Neutrality, etc (2011) and KOL103 | This Week in Law 133: Beyonce, Bad Laws, and Breastaurants (2011).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 133.I appeared on Ernie Hancock's show for all 3 hours of the July 9, 2014 episode to discuss intellectual property and related issues in detail. We discussed the constitutionality of IP, cryptocurrency/bitcoin, and related matters. This was a followup to the June 18 episode which featured Reed Jessen who was speaking about a way to fight patent trolls, which I called into.My previous appearances on Ernie's show: KOL089 | Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock radio: Intellectual Property, L. Neil Smith and KOL060 | Guest on Ernest Hancock’s Declare Your Independence radio show: intellectual property and libertarianism (2010).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 132.Michael Shanklin passed on to me a variety of questions on libertarian theory and applications for his Voluntary Virtues network. I'll be a regular guest monthly. Relevant links: Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian Approach.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 131.Jeff Tucker and I discuss the recent announcement by Tesla that it will cease enforcing its patents. Relevant links:All Our Patent Are Belong To You, By Elon Musk, CEO, Tesla Tucker, Tesla Shock: A Company Favors Competition Kinsella, The Patent Defense League and Defensive Patent Pooling

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 130.From the Bad Quaker podcast with host Ben Stone, Jeff Tucker and I discuss a variety of libertarian issues, including abortion and the like.Update: Here is the (lightly edited) text of the email I sent Tucker and Stone a few hours before the podcast, that was alluded to at the end:There is something I've been chewing over in my mind lately that I've been thinking about discussing or putting on a podcast, and I'll briefly mention below, in case you two think this is worth talking about.It concerns the interrelationship between concepts of aggression, self-ownership, and homesteading of external resources. Basically libertarians sometimes treat aggression as a primary, and then struggle with including trespass to property as a case of it, ... so then some of them finally admit that aggression depends on property rights-you need to know who owns an apple before you can tell if someone's forceful taking of it (or keeping of it) is "aggression or not." But then you get them turn around and apply property-ownership principles that apply to the apple--like contracts and homesteading--back to one's body, after all one is a "self-owner" and therefore, "just like" the way you own the apple was by homesteading and you can have a contract to sell it, you also gain ownership of your body by homesteding and you can also sell it (voluntary slavery). I think Walter Block employs a version of this reasoning, and I've heard others employ variations of it.(A similar fallacy is the twin pair of related ideas: if you own something, that implies that you can sell it; and if you sell something, that implies you must own it first. The former idea, which is based on a flawed idea about the origin and nature of property rights and contract theory, is used to justify voluntary slavery; the second, which is based on a flawed understanding of contract theory, is used to justify intellectual property.)I've thought about this of the years, and kept toying in my mind with Rand's (to my mind original) expression of the non-initiation of force principle. Similar to the way I toyed with self-ownership and finally figured it out due to Hoppe's insights on this very topic, combined with his singular focus on economic scarcity as the touchstone of property (something Rothbard didn't do, whcih is why he went astray on IP and a couple other fairly minor issues having to do with contract theory). Rand didn't do it either, which is why she also was a bit fuzzy, beyond her NAP. What Hoppe made me realize (as I discuss in How We Come To Own Ourselves) is that there is a difference in the basis of property rights in one's body, and in external resources. It is a difference that is already partially implicit in the elementary formulation of the NAP itself, as Rand and Rothbard formulated it.The difference is this. it is not homesteading that is primary. It is the objective link--some objective, demonstrable link between the owner/claimant and the resource in dispute (an "intersubjectively ascertainable" link, as Hoppe might say in Kantian terms). The purpose of property rights is to allocate or determine an owner of a disputed resource, in the case of a dispute, so as to avoid conflict and to permit resources in general to be used productively. Thus the allocation rule has to be based on some objective criteria, not on something arbitrary, particularizable, or mere verbal decree--since the latter types of basis for deciding who owns something does not fulfill the function of property rights--of avoiding conflict, since if the rule is inherently arbitrary or unfair or particularizable then we cannot expect the people on the receiving end to respect it, so there will just be confict once more (might makes right; war of all against all). And any number of people could simultaneoulsy verbally claim the resource, so that could never be a good way. It has to be an objective criterion that everyone can see ...

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 129.This is a lesson/lecture I presented to a group of "Upper Elementary" Montessori students today at my son's school, The Post Oak School (Upper El includes 4th, 5th, and 6th grade students, and there were also a few third graders visiting from lower el, who are moving up next year). The students (25 or 30 or so) sat in a group at my feet, and were polite and interested the whole time. They asked many very intelligent and fun questions. I tried not to get too complicated, but did speak in fairly frank and sophisticated terms, tried not to talk down to them or dumb the talk down too much, and almost all of them hung in there till the end. The original plan was to speak for 40 or so minutes then take questions for another 15 or so, but we ended up going about an hour and 7 minutes, and then during lunch I had throng of students throwing more questions at me for another half hour. What amazing students; what an amazing school and educational approach. (This is one reason I love the Montessori approach; see my Montessori, Peace, and Libertarianism.) I included here only the main talk and Q&A, not the lunch banter. (An article prepared by 6th graders in the class, describing the lecture, appears in the first couple of pages of this issue of the class newsletter.)I think this talk is suitable for kids from ages 9 to 16 or so.The notes I used and handed out are reproduced below, with a few links added.For more background on these topics, see the links below, as well as my short article Legislation and Law in a Free Society, adapted from my 1995 JLS article Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society, which contains detailed references; and my more detailed speech The (State’s) Corruption of (Private) Law, from the 2012 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society.Update: Some people have asked me for further recommended readings, in legal history, etc. Unfortunately my library is packed away in boxes now for a renovation so I cannot peruse my legal theory/history titles, but from memory and some other notes I have, here are some suggested readings related to the talk. Some of my own personal favorites first:Bruno Leoni, Freedom and the Law Watson, Alan, The Importance of “Nutshells” Herman, Shael, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States Giovanni Sartori, Liberty and Law Alan Watson, Roman Law and Comparative Law The Story of Law, by John M. Zane (I haven't finished it yet but liked what read so far) (also online) Arthur Hogue, The Origins of the Common LawSee also my post Book Recommendations: Private, International, and Common Law; Legal Theory, and also: The Greatest Libertarian Books and Other Top Ten Lists of Libertarian Books.For some others:A History of American Law, 2d. ed., 1985, Lawrence M. Friedman Trakman, Leon E., The Law Merchant: The Evolution of Commercial Law Oliver Wendell Holmes, The Common Law Buckland, W.W. & Arnold D. McNair, Roman Law and Common Law: A Comparison in Outline The Bramble Bush: On Our Law and Its Study, by Karl N. Llewellyn Jhering, Dr. Rudolph von, The Struggle for Law Harold J. Berman, Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition. “The latter is one of the greatest books (not just of law, but of any subject) I’ve ever read; and the former is full of interesting argument and facts. Berman also has a sequel, published a few years ago, that carries the story through the Protestant Reformation, but I haven’t read it yet. I venture to recommend it, sight unseen, on the strength of my admiration of its predecessor.” (Thanks to Robert Higgs.) Alan Watson, The Making of the Civil Law Rosalyn Higgins: Problems and Process: International Law and How We Use It Giovanni Sartori, Democratic Theory Merryman, John Henry, The Civil Law Tradition: An Introduction to the Legal Systems of Western Europe and Latin America, 2d. ed.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 128.From Jan. 2012, an interview by Peter Mac from The Peter Mac Show about the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 127.From December 2011, an interview by Stefan Molyneux for his Freedomain Radio program about the evil Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA. We discussed the First Amendment violations of and other problems with SOPA.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 126.This is my Mises University 2011 lecture, Intellectual Property and Economic Development (July 27, 2011), perhaps one of my better talks on IP and liberty. The original PowerPoint slides are here. Streaming audio, video, and a googledocs version of the slides are below. An unedited, raw transcript is also appended below (it may be cleaned up in due course).TranscriptMark Thornton: Our first speaker this morning is Stephan Kinsella. He is a patent attorney from Houston and the editor of Libertarian Papers. His lecture this morning is going to be on Intellectual Property and Economic Development.Stephan…Stephan Kinsella: Thanks Mark. I’m very glad to be here at the Mises University. I was here a couple of years ago. It is always a great thing. So let me get started. I have a lot to cover so I will try to go as quickly as possible without going too fast.Most of you should already be familiar with the basic idea of praxeology. There is a reason I’m going to start with this and it will become clearer in a moment. Praxeology is the formal study of the implications of the fact that men use means to attain various ends.What we do is we start with incontestable or a priori propositions that are related to human action and its categories. Primarily, for the purposes of our lecture today, humans employ scarce means to pursue ends. There are, of course, other categories applied in action such as causality, choice, cost, profit, and loss.Now another aspect of economic analysis is contingent facts. After we recognize and establish what the a priori categories of action are, we explicitly introduce certain contingent facts to make the analysis interesting.As Hoppe explains: “Mises explains the entire body of economic theory as implied in and deducible from a conceptual understanding of the meaning of action plus a few general, explicitly introduced assumptions about the empirical reality in which action has taken place”. So, in other words, we make some assumptions to make the analysis more interesting and more relevant to our lives. Mises, of course, talks explicitly about this.The branches of praxeology would include both catalytics and Crusoe economics for example. So, for example, we would assume private property rights and a market to make the analysis interesting. We would assume there is a money society, for example, instead of just barter. Economic analysis presupposes some legal system as well and a property rights framework. In a market economy, this include at least private property and scarce resources and related rights like contract and negotiable instruments, promissory notes and debts, service contracts, and so on. When you see economists reason about a banking system or an economy, they are taking for granted, or they are assuming, that there is in place a certain legal system, a certain respect for private property rights. These are not a priori assumptions. These are explicitly introduced background assumptions about the nature of legal rights that are possessed by actors.Economics is just a branch of praxeology, according to Mises. It is the most developed branch so far. What other branches of praxeology could there be? Of course, economics can include Crusoe economics and catallactics. Mieses said that other branches could include the study of war, game theory, and things like this.Roderick Long has a comment that the way we sometimes use economics is so broad that it is basically the same thing as praxeology so it is not clear what types of fields would not be included in economics that would be praxeology. In any case, you will see Austrians explicity use praxeological analysis and economic analysis to analyze the effects of aggression as well as private property and the free market.For example, Mises analyzes the Hamburg Market economy and State Interventionism.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 125. Richard Heathen of Liberty Machine News interviews Stephan Kinsella about the evils intellectual property, why it it illegitimate and how it empowers crony capitalism through heavy handed state enforcement. (recorded April 10, 2014; uploaded May 12, 2014)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 124.This is my appearance from last Saturday (April 26, 2014) on the Patriot's Lament radio show in Alaska, with host Joshua Bennett. We discussed a variety of topics, including anarchy versus the state versus government, how anarchist societies would handle threats from states, the unique aspects of libertarianism and what sets it apart from all other political philosophies, and related topics. (Youtube)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 123.Daniel Rothschild arranged for and moderated a debate between me and Objectivist/classical liberal (or whatever he is) Jan Helfeld. I lost my temper with the guy because I refused to let him do what I've seen him do to others—take the moral highground (which, as someone defending the state against me, a real libertarian, I was not going to let him do) and use his boring/bludgeoning "socratic" debate technique to try to boringly wear people down. I refused to give in to either, which resulted in the funny mess that you can see here.Of course, Helfeld never seriously tried to justify aggression or the state. He read from a prepared script, like a parakeet. And one of his arguments hinted at the idea that the state does commit aggression but that it is worth it because it prevents more serious aggression that would occur under a condition of anarchy; though he never made this argument explicitly. The other one suggested by him is that if Stephan Kinsella might in some conceivable emergency commit trespass to steal food, that means that aggression is not objectionable as a general matter, i.e. the state is justified in stealing $3trillion a year from US taxpayers because a starving Stephan Kinsella could conceivably be willing to break into a cabin in the woods to steal a can of beans. Again, Helfeld does not want to make this argument so explicitly because then it would rightly subject him to ridicule.My opening statement was originally lost due to technical issues and deleted by Helfeld, but James Cox somehow saved it and spliced it in with take two.The following is a short portion that was deleted, but kept by Cox:For those who think I was too rude or disrespectful to Helfeld, I submit this video showing his interaction with Jeff Tucker:Update: See Robert Wenzel's post "Kinsela Constantly Insulted Me, Interrupted Me and Broke His Agreement" (Wenzel too stupid or sloppy to spell my last name right), and his post Is This What Kinsella Was Afraid Of?.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 122.I appeared recently on the Canadian libertarian podcast Ed and Ethan: The Voice of Liberty in Canada (April 26, 2014) (I was a guest in 2012 and 2013 as well). We discussed the Aereo copyright case, IP in the Eastern District of Texas (see reporting by Joe Mullen), net neutrality, and other matters. This is my segment only; for the full show, go to Ed and Ethan’s show page for Episode 107.For background: see Dropbox clarifies its policy on reviewing shared files for DMCA issues, and links above.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 121.I was interviewed by Redmond Weissenberger, of Mises Canada, for his Better Red than Dead podcast (iTunes). We discussed a variety of topics, including: store refuses to put boy's name on an Easter egg because of a copyright concern because he shares a name with a famous soccer player, positive versus negative rights, Alexis de Tocqueville on servitudes and liberty, and intellectual property (IP) as negative servitudes; Ayn Rand's confusion on property rights and IP; property as the least bad option; the impossibility of a post-scarcity world; the dispute over "privilege checking" and attempts to speak the language of progressives; Hoppe on immigration and monarchy.More information on some of the topics discussed can be found in the following articles and blog posts:Boy named after Wayne Rooney not allowed personalised Easter egg due to 'copyright law'DropBox Keeps Users From Sharing Copyrighted Material The Girl With the Xeroxed Tattoo Maori Angry About Mike Tyson’s Tattoo Artist Claiming To Own Maori-Inspired Design Guy Who Did Mike Tyson’s Tattoo Sues Warner Bros. For Copyright Infringement The IP War on 3D Printing BeginsIntellectual Property Rights as Negative Servitudes"Society will develop a new kind of servitude which covers the surface of society with a network of complicated rules, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate. It does not tyrannise but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd." Alexis de TocquevillePrivate Property, the Least Bad Option, by Joseph S. DiedrichDoes Intellectual Property Defy Human Nature?, Diedrich Joseph Diedrich: Intellectual Property Cannot Be PropertyLocke on IP; Mises, Rothbard, and Rand on Creation, Production, and ‘Rearranging’Ayn Rand on eminent domainThe Problem with “Coercion” The Three Languages of Politics featuring Arnold Kling, Aaron Ross Powell, and Trevor Burrus On the Danger of Metaphors in Scientific Discourse Thomas Knapp re Hoppe and CarsonHoppe: Marx was “Essentially Correct”Hoppe is Not a Monarchist"Abolishing forced integration requires the de-democratization of society and ultimately the abolition of democracy. More specifically, the power to admit or exclude should be stripped from the hands of the central government and reassigned to the states, provinces, cities, towns, villages, residential districts, and ultimately to private property owners and their voluntary associations." Hoppe, Democracy, p. 148 Kinsella, A Simple Libertarian Argument Against Unrestricted Immigration and Open Borders

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 120.A computer science student at UT Austin, Adam Camac, asked me to do an interview with him on the referenced topic for purposes of one of his computer science classes. It was an interesting discussion.Youtube of the video version is below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 119.This is Part 1 of a fairly in-depth discussion I had with Harrison Fischberg (who was on a previous podcast in episode 114) covering various libertarian issues, such as property, the state, strategy and tactics and personal style versus substance, the standard versus Austrian view of homo economicus, Alan Moore versus Alfred Cuzon's views on anarchy, IP, the importance of technology and the Internet, and so on.Youtube of the full video version below.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 118.I was a guest on the Tom Woods show on March 28, 2014, Episode 127—our discussion includes an overview of libertarian ideas and an attempt to clear up common confusions.For more along the same lines, see my Mises Academy course on "Libertarian Controversies" and “Correcting some Common Libertarian Misconceptions,” 2011 Annual Meeting, Property and Freedom Society (May 28, 2011) [podcast here]; also On the Danger of Metaphors in Scientific Discourse.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 117.This is the audio for episode 004 of Liberty Talk, an occasional Google hangout-based podcast with Jeffrey Tucker and me (Google Plus page; Youtube Channel).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 116.This is my recent appearance on Michael Shanklin’s Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast with Michael Shanklin (my segment starts about around 1:11:23 of the video below). We discussed a variety of topics fraud and contract theory, and so on. Apparently Christopher Cantwell was on before I joined, but as we had had some words previously, he ducked out before I joined and then rejoined after I came on. It seemed a bit like an ambush to me, but I tried to be patient and explain things to him he was confused about, regarding fraud, his facebook page being taken down due to a complaint, contract and property theory, and so on.Some background material for these topics can be found at:A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability; Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian Approach; What Libertarianism Is; The Libertarian Approach to Negligence, Tort, and Strict Liability: Wergeld and Partial Wergeld; Rand on IP, Owning “Values”, and “Rearrangement Rights”; Hoppe on Property Rights in Physical Integrity vs Value; “Aggression” versus “Harm” in Libertarianism.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 115.I was interviewed back in May 2012 by Redmond Weissenberger, Director of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada. We had a long-ranging discussion of the issue of corporations and limited liability, and we touched on other issues as well including causation and responsibility and the praxeological structure of human action; intellectual property; gay marriage and language; human rights as property rights, and free speech; corporate size and international trade in a free society, vs. left-libertarian claims to the contrary; nuclear power, energy, and environmentalists; eminent domain and the Keystone pipeline; Peter Klein and Murray Rothbard on the calculation problem and the upper limit to the firm; state monopolies versus the market; and practical and moral aspects of tax evasion and tax avoidance.For background on some of the issues discussed, see my post Corporate Personhood, Limited Liability, and Double Taxation; also Causation and Aggression and California Gay Marriage Law Overturned: What Should Libertarians Think?; Peter Klein’s chapter “Economic Calculation and the Limits of Organization,” in The Capitalist and the Entrepreneur: Essays on Organizations and Markets; The Effects of Patent and Copyright on Hollywood Movies; Leveraging IP.For some more recent discussions of the corporation issue, see these podcasts: KOL100 | The Role of the Corporation and Limited Liability In a Free Society (PFS 2013) and KOL 026 | FreeDomain Radio with Stefan Molyneux discussing Corporations and Limited Liability.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 114. Stef and I talk about libertarian ethics, UPB, self-ownership, argumentation ethics, careers, schooling, and related matters—back from November 2013.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 113.Audio version (narrated by Carlos Morales) of my article “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide,” Mises Daily (May 27, 2011).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 112.From the vault. This is from 1989, an interview by my good friend Jack Criss, then host of a libertarian AM radio talk show on WJNT in Jackson, Mississippi (now the editor of BAMSouth). Jack interviewed lots of libertarian luminaries on that show, including Murray Rothbard and many others.At the time of this podcast I was an LSU law student and was talking in favor of educational vouchers—something I completely disagree with now, by the way. But I had not yet at the time reached the full flower of my current Austro-libertarian-anarchist radicalism. To my ear, too, I think I had a thicker Louisiana accent back then.Good times.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 111.This was my appearance on Daniel Rothschild’s youtube channel on Jan. 20, 2014; we discussed a variety of topics, getting really into the nitty-gritty of a lot of aspects of libertarian legal theory.For some background on some issues discussed, see:Trademark versus Copyright and Patent, or: Is All IP Evil? The Libertarian Approach to Negligence, Tort, and Strict Liability: Wergeld and Partial Wergeld Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian ApproachPrevious podcast with Daniel: KOL095 | Interview with Daniel Rothschild on Children’s Rights, Aggression, Contract Theory, Self-Ownership, Voluntary Slavery, and More. See also: KOL004 | Interview with Walter Block on Voluntary Slavery.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 110.I appeared recently on the Canadian libertarian podcast Ed and Ethan: The Voice of Liberty in Canada (Dec. 29, 2013) (I was a guest last year as well). We discussed the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and other matters. This is my segment only; for the full show, go to Ed and Ethan's show page for Episode 90.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 109. This is the audio for episode 005 of Liberty Talk, a weekly-ish Google hangout-based podcast with Jeffrey Tucker and me (Google Plus page; Youtube Channel). Though it's been a month since our last one. Hey, it happens.Today: we discuss Adam Kokesh and his recent brush with the "law" (see FDR2561), Liberty.me, 3D Printing, libertarian activism, nonscarce goods, intellectual property, The Mises Seminar Australia, trade secrets, and more.Next week: we discuss Richard Posner, Richard Epstein, and the Chicago school, and their argument for IP.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 108.This was my (remotely delivered) presentation, “Why Intellectual Property is not Genuine Property,” at the 3rd Adam Smith Forum, Moscow, Russia (Nov. 12, 2011).As I noted in a previous post, this event was held Nov. 12, 2011 in Moscow. It was organized by the Center for the Philosophy of Freedom, the Libertarian Party of Russia, and others. The Chairman of the ASF Steering Committee was economist Pavel Usanov, head of the Hayek Institute for Economy and Law, and Andrey Shal'nev, head of the federal committee of the Libertarian Party of Russia, was its co-chairman. I was invited to speak but could not attend in person, so my 47-minute speech "Why Intellectual Property is not Genuine Property" was presented remotely, with Russian subtitles. It is below, along with the original version and the English transcript plus the Russian translation, which was prepared by Maxim Tulenin, head of the Moscow branch of the Libertarian Party of Russia. Pictures from the event are here. The program with the list of speakers and topics is here (English translation).Tulenin told me after the event: I'm head of the Moscow branch of the Libertarian Party of Russia and I did the translation of your very consistent and convincing video lecture into Russian. Let me thank you, on behalf of the steering committee, Andrey Shal'nev and the participants for your contribution to the Forum, it was a great success with the audience, especially with the younger generation. I also tip my hat to you for the analytic case you've made against "intellectual property" because it has provided me with a pattern of argumentation suitable for my own Internet debates. One of the participants in the Forum provided a brief overview of my talk (rough English translation). The Forum's promo video excerpt, with Russian subtitles, is below, followed by the subtitled version presented at the Forum; the original version of my speech (without subtitles) follows these. The audio file is here. The English transcript is below; a Russian translation which was used for subtitles for the version presented at the Forum. The powerpoint presentation I used is also streamed below.Stephan Kinsella speech at IIIrd Adam Smith Forum from ivangoe on Vimeo.Why “Intellectual Property” is not Genuine Property Stephan Kinsella Libertarian Papers, C4SIF.org Adam Smith Forum Moscow November 12, 2011 (Edited transcript)Abstract: Intellectual property rights, or IP—primarily patent and copyright—has long been viewed as a legitimate type of property right by libertarians and other defenders of capitalism and free markets. I argue that IP rights are not genuine property rights, and that these laws should be abolished. This issue is relevant to Russia and Adam Smith Forum members because of the pressure by the US on Russia and other countries to adopt western-style patent and copyright law. But the west has attempted to export many other laws and policies to other nations, many of which are not compatible with a free market, such as antitrust (competition), antibribery, tax, narcotics, and central banking laws and practices.In this talk I provide an overview of the nature of patent and copyright, followed by a discussion of the nature and purpose of law and property rights in a world of scarcity. I argue that property rights apply to scarce resources only, to permit such resources to be used peacefully, productively, and cooperatively as a means of action. However, property rights make no sense are in fact perverse and undermine genuine property rights when the law attempt to apply them to information, ideas, and knowledge. Property rights must be granted in scarce resources and only in scarce resources if we are to have prosperity, freedom, and progress in science.In fact, state IP rights are not genuine property rights, but are instead neo-mercantilist monopoly grants of privilege that protect favored ...

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 107.This was one of my guest appearances on Adam vs. the Man (Oct. 25, 2011), episode "on “AVTM + Stephan Kinsella: “Intellectual Property” vs The 4th Amendment," discussing Copyright and Neo-Mercantilism and related issues. We discussed U.S. Copyright Czar Cozied Up to Content Industry, E-Mails Show and related issues such as neo-mercantilist aspects of modern patent and copyright law (discussed in my post Rothbard on Mercantilism and State “Patents of Monopoly”).This was the new, 3.0 version of Adam's show. The previous version was carried by RT (Russia Today). I had appeared a couple times on the 2.0 show—On Adam vs. The Man re Drug Patents and Adam the Man vs. IP.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 106.I was a guest today on the Peter Schiff Show (guest host Stefan Molyneux), discussing: ObamaCare's Next Legal Hurdle. Stephan Kinsella, patent attorney & director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom, on how ObamaCare still fails any reasonable legal test, whether anything constructive may come from the Apple/Samsung battle, and why entrepreneurs needn't worry about their intellectual property. Links to issues discussed:Oklahoma lawsuit to derail Obamacare? House passes Innovation Act by vote of 325-91: a small solution to a big patent problemSee also Another Problem with Legislation: James Carter v. the Field Codes: From an 1884 paperby James C. Carter, The Proposed Codification of Our Common Law: A Paper Prepared at the Request of The Committee of the Bar Association of the City of New York, Appointed to Oppose the Measure, defending New York's common law from David Dudley Field’s attempt to (legislatively) codify it: At present, when any doubt arises in any particular case as to what the true rule of the unwritten [i.e., judge-found, common-law developed] law is, it is at once assumed that the rule most in accordance with justice and sound policy is the one which must be declared to be the law. The search is for that rule. The appeal is squarely made to the highest considerations of morality and justice. These are the rallying points of the struggle. The contention is ennobling and beneficial to the advocates, to the judges, to the parties, to the auditors, and so indirectly to the whole community. The decision then made records another step in the advance of human reason towards that perfection after which it forever aspires. But when the law is conceded to be written down in a statute, and the only question is what the statute means, a contention unspeakably inferior is substituted. The dispute is about words. The question of what is right or wrong, just or unjust, is irrelevant and out of place. The only question is what has been written. What a wretched exchange for the manly encounter upon the elevated plane of principle! For more on problems of legislation, and discussion of legal codes and codification efforts, see myLegislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society; and the articles collected here; also my posts Book Recommendations: Private, International, and Common Law; Legal Theory and The UN, International Law, and Nuclear Weapons. In particular, for further related commentary, see my Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society, e.g., note 78 and related text.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 105.This is an interview I did a couple years ago with my friend, Dr. John McGinnis, on his radio show, “Open Mike with Dr. John McGinnis,” WRTA (Sep. 19, 2011), discussing the America Invents Act. I met John when I lived in Philadelphia in the 90s, when we were both involved with the Freeman Society of Valley Forge (FEE-related), which helped me meet Hans Sennholz and Jacob Hornberger. A former economics professor, he is now a member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.For background information on the AIA, see my Mises Academy webinar, The American Invents Act and Patent Reform: The Good, the Meh, and the Ugly (audio and slides).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 104.This is my appearance as a Guest panelist on This Week in Law, Episode 97 (Feb. 4, 2011), entitled “God Creates. We Patent.” Brief description: "It's a Bing trap, Internet rights, tracking data persistence, attorney motivation, abolishing IP, life patents, and more", such as net neutrality (see: A Libertarian Take on Net Neutrality).My previous blog post about this is here.The video is below; it’s also on the TWiL page for this episode; you can also subscribe to the audio or video podcast for this show; here’s their FaceBook page.TWiL is part of Leo Laporte’s impressive and growing private TWiT (This Week in Tech) netcast network (I regularly listen to the TWiT network’s This Week in Tech, MacBreak Weekly, and TWiL, in addition to my some of my other favorite podcasts, such as Mises podcasts, Lew Rockwell, and the Slate Culture Gabfest and Slate Political Gabfest.)In addition to Howell and me, there were two other IP/tech lawyers. We had a very civil and wide-ranging discussion of a number of topics, from the Google vs. Bing “search cheating” dispute, Internet access rights as “human rights,” abolishing IP and gene patents, defensive patent publishing, lawyers as vigorous representatives of their clients’ interests, and more (most of the topics we discussed are linked on Howell's Delicious bookmarks page for that episode).I already knew Howell was a very good host, having seen the show before, but I have to say I was very pleasantly surprised at how tolerant and even libertarian-leaning the other lawyers were of my very radical anti-state, anti-IP views. We had a very good conversation and the other panelists were very receptive to my outspoken libertarian stance. Maybe there is hope!

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 103.This is my appearance as a Guest panelist on This Week in Law, Episode 133 (Oct. 13, 2011), entitled "Beyonce, Bad Laws, and Breastaurants." The two hosts and fellow guest panelist were all lawyers. We had a wide-ranging two-hour discussion about a variety of legal and policy matters, including a number of IP problems covering patent, copyright, trademark, and even trade secret. We also discussed the Occupy Wall Street movement, Apple's use of IP to squelch clones and competition, copyright threats against Beyonce for her dance moves, and many others as indicated by the links on the episode's show notes.The video is below; it's also on the TWiL page for this episode; you can also subscribe to the audio or video podcast for this show; here's their FaceBook page.A few more backup links and points below about some of the issues discussed.At one point we got into a discussion of Obama's use of a signing statement to approve ACTA as an "executive agreement" (see ACTA, Executive Agreements, and the Bricker Amendment), I noted that under international law, violation by a host state of the citizen of another state gave rise to a right for the violated citizen's home state to use military force against the host state. I remarked that one danger of internationalizing intellectual property by means of executive agreements and treaties is that it could give western nations an excuse to military force against countries that allow piracy. However, this was a bit of an overstatement since, as I explain in International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution: A Practitioner’s Guide (see this excerpt), this type of "gunboat diplomacy" is ostensibly no longer permitted since the founding of the UN in 1945: "Today, some investors hailing from militarily and politically powerful States might favor the threat or use of force to obtain restitution or compensation for expropriated property. Such an option is no longer available, however, due to fundamental changes in international law and politics. In particular, the United Nations Charter has since 1945 prohibited the use of force to resolve disputes, except in the case of self-defence. Today, it is generally accepted that a State may not use force against another State in response to a taking of the property of one of its nationals." The quote I mentioned about the problem with making law by legislation is by James Carter, who wrote, in 1884, in opposing the attempt to codify New York's common law: At present, when any doubt arises in any particular case as to what the true rule of the unwritten [i.e., judge-found, common-law developed] law is, it is at once assumed that the rule most in accordance with justice and sound policy is the one which must be declared to be the law. The search is for that rule. The appeal is squarely made to the highest considerations of morality and justice. These are the rallying points of the struggle. The contention is ennobling and beneficial to the advocates, to the judges, to the parties, to the auditors, and so indirectly to the whole community. The decision then made records another step in the advance of human reason towards that perfection after which it forever aspires. But when the law is conceded to be written down in a statute, and the only question is what the statute means, a contention unspeakably inferior is substituted. The dispute is about words. The question of what is right or wrong, just or unjust, is irrelevant and out of place. The only question is what has been written. What a wretched exchange for the manly encounter upon the elevated plane of principle!I mentioned the tension between antitrust and patent/copyright law; more discussion of this issue can be found in endnote 1 here; We discussed the America Invents Act; I've since completed a detailed writeup about this: The American Invents Act and Patent Reform: The Good, the Meh, and the Ugly;

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 102.I was reminded recently of the excellent Canadian libertarian podcast Ed and Ethan: The Voice of Liberty in Canada when they were guest co-hosts on a recent episode of the superb Freedom Feens radio show. And that I had been a guest about a year ago. Here is my November 2012 appearance on their show, which I think was a very good and concise IP discussion. My segment is podcast here, which starts at aboot 57 minutes into the full episode, which is also linked below. The audio quality is very good on this one. I have to say—sometimes I give good podcast. And this was one of those times.“Intellectual Property Law in Canada,” Ed and Ethan Podcast: The voice of liberty in Canada (Nov. 17, 2012) (full MP3; Youtube—link down at present for some reason).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 101.This was my talk delivered at the Open Science Summit, Mountain View, CA (Oct. 22, 2011), held at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California. My panel's topic was "The Future (the End?) of 'Intellectual Property.'" My talk, "IP and the New Mercantilism," is first, and lasts about the first 19 minutes. The slideshow I used (but did not show the audience) is also below.My original title was "IP and the New Mercantilism," but I think a better title is "Property and Science: The Twin Pillars of Prosperity and Civilization—Versus Patent and Copyright."Background: See my posts Open Science Summit Streaming Live; Kinsella on Panel at Open Science Summit.Update: The transcript of my talk is here.If the video embed below does not work, the video of the lecture may be found here.The Future (the End?) of "Intellectual Property" from Open Science Summit on FORA.tvThe Future (the End?) of "Intellectual Property" from Open Science Summit on FORA.tvAs I noted in previous posts (Open Science versus Intellectual Property and Kinsella on Panel at Open Science Summit), this is a fascinating and promising movement/group that is devoting a great deal of attention to how IP affects science (for more on the OSS, see The Open Science Shift, Xconomy; Open science: a future shaped by shared experience, The Guardian; footage from last year's summit is available on the OSS Youtube channel).In fact a good deal of the Opening Session of the 2010 Open Science Summit was devoted to IP horror stories and ways in which it interferes with science and the spread of knowledge (go to about 8:20 for the beginning of this discussion).For a related talk, “Science is a Private Good – Or: Why Government Science is Wasteful” (video; audio; and below) delivered at the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society in Bodrum, Turkey, by Terence Kealey, a biochemist at the University of Buckingham and author of Sex, Science and Profits and The Economic Laws of Scientific Research. (See my post Bodrum Days and Nights: The Fifth Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society: A Partial Report.)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 100.This is my speech at the 2013 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society (Sept. 22, 2013, Bodrum, Turkey). The video and slides are below. I will post the Q&A panel later, which contains several interchanges between me and Sean Gabb about this issue. See also Sean Gabb's article Stephan Kinsella on Limited Liability: Notes of a Speech Made to the 2013 Meeting in Bodrum of the Property and Freedom Society, to which I intend to reply at a later time..For background, see:Kinsella, Corporate Personhood, Limited Liability, and Double Taxation; In Defense of the Corporation Robert Hessen, In Defense of the Corporation (Hoover 1978) Firms: google various recent Mises University lectures by Peter Klein on the theory of the firm Yaron Brook, “The Corporation” (Ayn Rand Institute, 2007) KOL 026 | FreeDomain Radio with Stefan Molyneux discussing Corporations and Limited LiabilityStephan Kinsella, "The Role of the Corporation and Limited Liability In a Free Society" from Property & Freedom Society on Vimeo.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 099.This was my appearance on the Agora I/O: The Liberty Unconference: Open Source Agorism: Prosper Without Patents or Copyrights from 2011.The video(s) are below. Interesting factoid: I was set to do the show, using Justin.tv, but for some reason neither of my MacBooks would work with the Justin.tv interface. I saw an option for "mobile device." It was 5 minutes to showtime. I quickly downloaded Justin.tv app on my iphone, got out a little iPod tripod I had never used, signed in, hit the record button, and voilá--I was on Justin.tv streaming live, using my iphone. I was using my MacBook to watch it live, and to monitor questions typed on a facebook stream by the 45 or so participants. Quite amazing. (There are three videos b/c I had a couple of glitches/crashes and had to re-start my iPhone stream twice.)Watch live video from Agora I/O: Peaceful Evolution on Justin.tvWatch live video from Agora I/O: Peaceful Evolution on Justin.tvWatch live video from Agora I/O: Peaceful Evolution on Justin.tv

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 098.This is my appearance on the Oct. 19, 2013 Nomad Capitalist show, interviewed by Andrew Henderson. My segment beings at about 17:00. Topics discussed: Austrian economics, intellectual property law, escaping the USA0:00 Andrew leads off the show, live from Bangkok. He discusses the end of the government shutdown – and how to avoid the next, even more draconian version the US government has up its sleeve. Plus, he shares why the rest of the world doesn’t and shouldn’t care about shenanigans in the US.Andrew discusses how you are not a product of the borders you’re born within; you can define yourself as an individual, not as a government slave. He talks about the upcomingPassport to Freedom event13:35 Guest: Stephan Kinsella (Twitter)Anarcho-capitalist, liberty activist, and intellectual property lawyer Stephan Kinsella discusses why he believes intellectual property law is a sham and nothing more than crony capitalism. He shares his Austrian economics ideals and how he believes they can be better implemented in the USSA. Plus, Stephan and Andrew discuss why Shark Tank is the best show on television, and Stephan explains why he won’t be leaving his native Houston to live overseas any time soon. He and Andrew debate the merits of living overseas with a family and perpetual travel.Also mentioned in this show: Jeffrey Tucker Kevin O’LearyIf you like our content, subscribe to our free email newsletter and get a free whitepaper.Subscribe to our weekly radio show on iTunes and never miss a minute! Plus, check out our past radio shows and listen on demand.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 097.This is my interview on the Double Crossed radio show with host Chuck Horton. We discussed a variety of intellectual property related issues, some centered on some of my previous speeches and courses, such as “The Intellectual Property Quagmire, or, The Perils of Libertarian Creationism,” Austrian Scholars Conference 2008 and Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics,” (Mises Academy, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011) (discussed on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course). See also Karl Fogel on the history of copyright.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 096. This is a show I did Jan. 18, 2012, on WMNF 88.5 Radio, "Live for Liberty with Blake Westlake and Chris Horan," which was just uploaded to YouTube. Chris Horan kindly forwarded the link to me. We had a nice, short interview about the anti-competitive nature of intellectual property law.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 095.This was my appearance on Daniel Rothschild’s youtube channel on Nov. 8, 2013; we discussed a variety of topics, getting really into the nitty-gritty of a lot of aspects of libertarian legal theory. Links to related material below:How We Come To Own Ourselves, Mises Daily (Sep. 7, 2006) (Mises.org blog discussion; audio version) Causation and Aggression (co-authored with Patrick Tinsley), The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, vol. 7, no. 4 (winter 2004): 97-112 Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach, 12:1 Journal of Libertarian Studies 51 (Spring 1996) “What Libertarianism Is,” Mises Daily (August 21, 2009) A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability, Journal of Libertarian Studies 17, no. 2 (Spring 2003): 11-37 “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide,” Mises Daily (May 27, 2011) KOL004 | Interview with Walter Block on Voluntary Slavery KOL018 | “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society: Lecture 1: Libertarian Basics: Rights and Law” (Mises Academy, 2011)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 094. This is the audio for episode 004 of Liberty Talk, a weekly Google hangout-based podcast with Jeffrey Tucker and me (Google Plus page; Youtube Channel).[Update: for more on whether bitcoin is ownable property, see this Facebook thread. And see: Tokyo court says bitcoins are not ownable. See also:"in the WSJ article Tax Plan May Hurt Bitcoin, the article notes that legal tender laws are, in fact, jeopardizing BTC. Bitcoins are now classified by the IRS as “property” “instead of” as legal tender money, meaning capital gains taxes are owed on transactions. I mentioned this danger in my talk; a similar problem afflicts the re-adoption of gold or silver as money. But as I noted in the Q&A to my talk, I am not persuaded that bitcoins are ownable resources—things subject to property rights. The IRS here assumes that something is either money or property. This is one danger of BTC advocates using the language of property rights to describe bitcoins. I would argue that bitcoins are not legally owned and thus capital gains taxes are not applicable—or at least, this is one argument the target of a government tax evasion suit might want to use." KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender ]This week we talked to Cody Wilson, Director of Defense Distributed, inventor of the world-first working 3D printed gun, "The Liberator", and director of DarkWallet. See his Indiegogo campaign to fund Bitcoin Dark Wallet (see video below). Jeff asked him to recommend some of the books that had influenced him. They are:The Society of the Spectacle, by Guy Dubord The History of Sexuality, by Michel Foucault On the Genealogy of Morality, by Nietzsche

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 093. This is the audio for episode 003 of Liberty Talk, a new weekly-ish Google hangout-based podcast with Jeffrey Tucker and me (Google Plus page; Youtube Channel). This week we talked to Justin Hanners, a fired Auburn, Alabama cop (see Citizens Behind Officer Justin Hanners). He dropped by Jeff's office so we snagged a quick interview. He talks about police corruption and ticket quotas.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 092.This is my appearance on Michael Shanklin’s Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast with Michael Shanklin (Oct. 30, 2013). We discussed a variety of topics around IP and other issues, such as Can You Trade Something You Don't Own?, Polycentrism, Contract theory, argumentation ethics, and so on. Some background material for these topics can be found at:A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability, Journal of Libertarian Studies 17, no. 2 (Spring 2003): 11-37 KOL 044 | “Correcting some Common Libertarian Misconceptions” (PFS 2011) (see slide 7) KOL 049 | “Libertarian Controversies Lecture 5″ (Mises Academy, 2011) (see slide 15) “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide,” Mises Daily (May 27, 2011) The Origin of “Libertarianism” Corporate Personhood, Limited Liability, and Double Taxation KOL 026 | FreeDomain Radio with Stefan Molyneux discussing Corporations and Limited Liability 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 091. This is the audio for episode 002 of Liberty Talk, a new weekly-ish Google hangout-based podcast with Jeffrey Tucker and me (Google Plus page; Youtube Channel). This week we talked to Sheldon Richman about Obamacare and the origin of his anti-IP views.For more, see Sheldon's articles:Sheldon Richman on Intellectual Property versus Liberty Intellectual “Property” Versus Real Property: What Are Copyrights and What Do They Mean for Liberty?, The Freeman (12 June 2009 Patent Nonsense, The American Conservative (Jan. 1, 2012) Slave Labor and Intellectual Property: On a misplaced analogy, The Freeman Online(June 3, 2011)See also the FEE debate Sheldon mentions in the discussion: Intellectual Property Rights Debate; the Paul Cwik piece mentioned is discussed here.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 090.I spoke at Liberty on the Rocks-Houston last night on the topic of intellectual property. Nice crowd and a good time. I touched on a number of matters, from negative servitudes to positive rights. Zoe Russell and others did a great job running/arranging this. This is my own iPhone recording: not great quality, but mostly listenable. A better video/audio version ought to be forthcoming soon. In the meantime.... have fun.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 089.This is my appearance earlier today (10/23/2013) on Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock radio show. We talked intellectual property, including libertarian sci-fi author L. Neil Smith's pro-IP views (see The L. Neil Smith – FreeTalkLive Copyright Dispute; Smith, Unanimous Consent and the Utopian Vision or I Dreamed I Was a Signatory In My Maidenform Bra; Shire Society Forum, Topic: L. Neil Smith has Important Shire Business; L. Neil Smith, A New Covenant).2013-10-23 Hour 2 Stephan Kinsella from Ernest Hancock on Vimeo.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 088. This is the audio for episode 001 of Liberty Talk, a new weekly-ish Google hangout-based podcast with Jeffrey Tucker and me (Google Plus page; Youtube Channel).This week Jeff and I talked a variety of issues, including Jeff's recent Crypto-Currency Conference in Atlanta, his impromptu 50-person bar meetup in New York before the Students for Liberty regional conference in NY; and Jeff's thoughts on what he calls "the new libertarianism": a movement characterized by optimistic, entrepreneurial, pro-tech and smart young people interested in incorporating liberty into their lives; circumventing the state instead of pleading for it to give them an inch more of freedom, etc.Update: See Jeff's Freeman article The New Libertarianism.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 087.This was my appearance on Michael Shanklin's Voluntary Virtues Vodcast. We talked about the Stefan Molyneux vs. Zeitgeist guy "Peter Joseph" etc. Jeff Tucker made an impromptu entrance at the end, discombobulating everyone, as is his wont.Background:Zeitgeist Versus the Market - Peter Joseph Debates Stefan Molyneux Zeitgeist Examined: Peter Joseph/Stefan Molyneux Debate Analysis Peter Joseph on Stefan Molyneux: "The Art of Nonsense" | Pathology or Con-Artistry?

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 086.Last weekend I gave a talk “The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender,” at Jeff Tucker's Crypto-Currency Conference: Bitcoin and the Future of Money (Atlanta, Oct. 5, 2013). See KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender; slides below. Video/professional audio to be released later. Pix here and here.This is an interview I did with Kurt Wallace, of RARE radio, whom I met at the CCC. We discussed a variety of issues about bitcoin; the transcript is below. Rare Conversation LISTEN: Why the U.S. will declare war on BitcoinPBS News Hour clip: The currency known as Bitcoin, which made headlines earlier this week when the FBI seized Silk Road, the popular online black marketplace for drugs and other contraband, payable by Bitcoin had done over a billion dollars worth of business in just the last two years.Kurt Wallace for Rare: Bitcoin has made headlines on PBS News Hour, sparked by an online Bitcoin drug trafficking site. Mainstream companies are popping up all over the place, big time investors are getting involved in this emerging sector and there are crypto-currency conferences monthly and sometimes weekly all over the world. Even Canada has introduced their own government-backed digital currency called mint-chip. What is the future here in the United States regarding Bitcoin and digital currency? Here to help us out is registered patent attorney Stephan Kinsella, founder of Libertarian Papers and former adjunct professor at the South Texas College of Law. Good to have you on Stephan, thank you for joining us today.Stephan Kinsella: Thank you very much glad to be here.Rare: Silk Road is this online black-market that was shut down by the FBI last week. Should people be worried about using Bitcoin in the United States?Kinsella: I don’t think using Bitcoin itself is a big concern. Silk Road itself might be a different issue. You have to consider your own risks in using Silk Road, but Bitcoin itself … no, you can use Bitcoin without being implicated with the Silk Road issues right now.Rare: What’s happened with Silk Road, is that a benefit for Bitcoin or it that bad for Bitcoin?Kinsella: I think it’s good and bad, if you think about. Everything that people accuse Bitcoin of being bad for is true of the U.S. dollar. People are saying that Bitcoin is used for drug transactions. Well the U.S. dollar is used for that too. All the bad things that people accuse Bitcoin of are being used by the U.S. dollar. It’s just an alternative currency that people use. As long as you are careful and as long as you don’t use it for illegal transactions you should be OK.Rare: The U.S. government has the War on Drugs and the War on Poverty and the War on Terror and we were at this crypto-currency conference in Atlanta over the weekend, there were a lot of Libertarians there. A lot of people concerned about their freedoms and their ability to live their lives without government interference. Do we see a possibility of the United States government declaring a war on Bitcoin?Kinsella: Yes, I think there is a concern there, and the concern is that if the U.S. government sees a significant threat to its hegemony over the currency of the U.S. dollar, or the world monetary system. They will try and crack down on it. But we have seen this in the internet as well. I don’t believe the U.S. government, if they had known in the early 1990s what the internet would evolve into, I don’t think they would have allowed it. But it’s a little too late for them to stop it, I hope. I’m puzzling the same is true of Bitcoin and similar currencies.Rare: What part is Bitcoin going to play in the future of legal tender in the United States, with the rest of the world already embracing Bitcoin like in Europe and again Canada having their own digital currency?Kinsella: The legal tender is just another tool in the toolbox at stake that they can resort t...

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 085This is the audio (from my iPhone) of my talk “The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender,” from the Crypto-Currency Conference: Bitcoin and the Future of Money (Atlanta, Oct. 5, 2013). Slides below. Video/professional audio to be released later. Pix here and here.Update: Video is available here.Update: An (only lightly edited) transcript is appended below.Also: in the WSJ article Tax Plan May Hurt Bitcoin, the article notes that legal tender laws are, in fact, jeopardizing BTC. Bitcoins are now classified by the IRS as "property" "instead of" as legal tender money, meaning capital gains taxes are owed on transactions. I mentioned this danger in my talk; a similar problem afflicts the re-adoption of gold or silver as money. But as I noted in the Q&A to my talk, I am not persuaded that bitcoins are ownable resources—things subject to property rights. The IRS here assumes that something is either money or property. This is one danger of BTC advocates using the language of property rights to describe bitcoins. I would argue that bitcoins are not legally owned and thus capital gains taxes are not applicable—or at least, this is one argument the target of a government tax evasion suit might want to use.Update: Swiss Tax Authorities Confirm that Bitcoin is VAT-free in Switzerland:Bitcoin Association Switzerland reports that, according to the Swiss Federal Tax Administration, no VAT applies to bitcoin in Switzerland. The transfer of bitcoin doesn’t constitute delivery of goods or services, and therefore it’s not subject to VAT. Update: for more on whether bitcoin is ownable property, see this Facebook thread. And see: Tokyo court says bitcoins are not ownable. See also:FinCEN Rules Commodity-Backed Token Services are Money TransmittersAlso:"in the WSJ article Tax Plan May Hurt Bitcoin, the article notes that legal tender laws are, in fact, jeopardizing BTC. Bitcoins are now classified by the IRS as “property” “instead of” as legal tender money, meaning capital gains taxes are owed on transactions. I mentioned this danger in my talk; a similar problem afflicts the re-adoption of gold or silver as money. But as I noted in the Q&A to my talk, I am not persuaded that bitcoins are ownable resources—things subject to property rights. The IRS here assumes that something is either money or property. This is one danger of BTC advocates using the language of property rights to describe bitcoins. I would argue that bitcoins are not legally owned and thus capital gains taxes are not applicable—or at least, this is one argument the target of a government tax evasion suit might want to use." KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender ]See also: Bitcoin Is Officially a Commodity, According to U.S. Regulator; KOL191 | The Economy with Albert Lu: Can You Own Bitcoin? (1/3)Also: SEC: US Securities Laws 'May Apply' to Token SalesTRANSCRIPTIntroduction: [From Doug French]:Our next speaker has done nothing less than pathbreaking work in the area of intellectual property. He probably could be considered the "Satoshi of IP" if you will. An American intellectual property lawyer, a libertarian legal theorist, he's created the website The Libertarian Standard, he's created the academic journal Libertarian Papers, he's written a number of books, including my favorite, The Louisiana Civil Law Dictionary. He is best known for a book called, that really turned the libertarian world on its ear. This argument continues on. It rages on. He continues to take any and all comers online. But he is…well, this is the perfect time in the cyber world to have a lawyer in the house. And he is our lawyer in the house. Please help me welcome Stephan Kinsella.Stephan Kinsella:0:01:43.1

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 rightsTonight 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.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).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.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 077. Lions of Liberty podcast. From Marc Clair's podcast description: Episode 1: Stephan KinsellaSeptember 13, 2013In 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 marc@lionsofliberty.com. 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.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

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 StudentsOur 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, by Keir Martland. It was released as The Libertarian: Podcast #1. We discussed libertarian theory, Hans-Hermann Hoppe's libertarian views, argumentation ethics, immigration, and related matters. 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 IsI also did a previous written interview with Martland for that site: Interview by The Libertarian.

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, 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.

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.

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, 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 transcrip 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.

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), republished as “How to Slow Economic Progress,” Mises Daily (June 1, 2011). The Youtube video is 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, 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".

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).Transcript:Gene: I’m pleased to welcome as my guest Stephan Kinsella. Are you there, Stephan?Stephan Kinsella: I’m here. Glad to be here, Gene.Gene: Thanks for coming on. Let me read Stephan’s profile on Wikipedia: “Kinsella is General Counsel of Applied Opto-Electronics, Incorporated, 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. 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”.“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.“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.Stephan Kinsella: Thanks very much, Gene.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. 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?Stephan Kinsella: Well, that’s an interesting connection. For years now, I’ve been trying to 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 counter-intuitively, 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 portfol...

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). See also their interesting episode Against Intellectual Property: A Follow Up Discussion.

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.”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”- video below, but not included in the audio podcast; I discuss the conference in my post Bodrum Days and Nights: The Fifth Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society: A Partial Report.

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 on the Author's Forum 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.

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: 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 alsoKOL185: Clarifying Libertarian Theory (Liberty.me, July 2014) KOL 044 | “Correcting some Common Libertarian Misconceptions” (PFS 2011)SUGGESTED READING MATERIALGeneral background readings are below; other particular links are provided in the slides for each lecture:Recommended Background ReadingsKinsella, “What Libertarianism Is" Kinsella, "Libertarian Controversies" Hoppe, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism [TSC], chapters 1-2, 7Optional Background ReadingsRothbard, 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 IdealKinsellaWhat 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 SocietyRecommended Background Readings: OtherDavid 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 ZOptional Background Readings: BibliographiesHoppe, Anarcho-Capitalism: An annotated bibliography Kinsella, The Greatest Libertarian Books David Gordon on Liberty Lew Rockwell on Reading for Liberty Others at LRC BibliographiesUpdate: 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. I elaborate on these issues in my six-lecture Mises Academy course, "Libertarian Controversies," to be added to the podcast stream next (see KOL episodes 045-050).Update: see also KOL185: Clarifying Libertarian Theory (Liberty.me, July 2014)pfs-2011 Stephan Kinsella, Correcting Some Common Libertarian Misconceptions from Sean Gabb on Vimeo.[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.

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.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: I have just updated the mp3: I forgot to record it at my end until about 1:07, but my audio quality was better. So I spliced in the better second half from my recording. So starting at 1:07 or so you can hear better audio quality at my end, and no worse at Wenzel's.]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.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 well over a century ago as Wendy McElroy has documented in an outstanding article. Rothbard did not take this "contractual copyright" idea very far and indeed I believe it contradicts other aspects of his thought such as his contract theory (ch. 19 of Ethics of Liberty), his opposition to reputation rights/defamation law (ch. 16), and his explicit opposition to patents (ch. 16, also Man, Economy, and State and Power and Market, Scholars Edition, pp. liv, 745-54, 1133-38, 1181-86).But anyway, what does it matter? It's a bizarre appeal to authority. I am quite sure that Rothbard would have agreed with us anti-IP libertarians if he had had more time to sort it out; as I noted, it's implied in all the structure of his political theory. This is why Hoppe easily saw this by integrating Rothbardian and Misesian political economic ideas (Hoppe on Intellectual Property). But so what if he would not have? Then he would have been wrong. And so what if I had been wrong in listing Rothbard as an early libertarian opponent of IP (though he arguably was; although as the paper explained later on, his position was not fully fleshed out and/or had ambiguities). How does this prove IP is legitimate? It does not, but Wenzel has no good argument for IP which is why he for over two hours refuses my repeated requests that he provide one—after all, it's supposed to be a debate about IP. In fact in my opening statement I explained that the burden of proof is on ...

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 037. [Transcript.]I spoke last weekend at one of the best events I've ever been part of: the "Liberty in the Pines" (facebook event) conference at Stephen F. Austin State University, in Nacogdoches, Texas. 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.Update: See Stephen Decker's report on the event.For some background on some of the issues I discussed, see:Hume on Intellectual Property and the Problematic “Labor” Metaphor Locke on IP; Mises, Rothbard, and Rand on Creation, Production, and "Rearranging" "Locke, Smith, Marx and the Labor Theory of Value," Mises Economics Blog (June 23, 2010) (archived comments) “What Libertarianism Is” “How We Come To Own Ourselves" "Montessori, Peace, and Libertarianism" John Bremer, “Education as Peace”Update: The YouTube at the bottom had inferior audio to the podcast version that I recorded using the iPhone in my pocket. The YouTube immediately below incorporates the superior audio track (thanks to Manuel Lora).Original YouTube, with inferior audio:

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.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 034.I was a guest yesterday on Jake Shannon's libertarian "Mental Self Defense" radio show discussing intellectual property (what's new). Good host.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 033.I was interviewed back on Jan. 20, 2010 by Mark Edge, as part of his “Edgington Post Interview Series,” for his Free Talk Live radio show, about my Mises Daily article, “Reducing the Cost of IP Law.” The interview is lasts about 35 minutes, and starts at 2:02:36 in the original Jan. 20, 2010 show, which I have trimmed here. Edge conducted an excellent interview–very informed and interesting. And, like many others, he’s come around to the anti-IP position. (See, on this, Have You Changed Your Mind About Intellectual Property?, Yet another Randian recants on IP, The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism, The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism.)This podcast was discussed previously on the Mises blog.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 032.From Kinsella on Bill Handel Show Discussing Blackmail, Tiger Woods, David Letterman (Dec. 14, 2009) (Mises): I was a guest on the Bill Handel Show in late 2009 discussing the libertarian perspective on blackmail, with reference to the Tiger Woods and other cases. (See my post Blackmail should be legal: the case of David Letterman.) We also touched on common law versus legislation (see my Legislation and Law in a Free Society), intellectual property, reputation rights and defamation law, prostitution, and extortion. Handel, though apparently not a libertarian, was a very smart and fair host. See the Bill Handel Show podcast.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 031.This is my appearance on the Smash Walls Radio Podcast, Episode 9: Patent Shenanigans, with host Trevor Hultner. We discussed patent trolls, the SHIELD Act, and related matters.For more on that issue, see Patent trolls as mafioso (and that’s a compliment) and The SHIELD Act doesn’t go far enough: protect victims of all patent aggressors, not just “trolls”.Update: See Trevor Hultner: Patent “Trolls” are Bad. Patents are Worse.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 030.This is an interview of Derek Khanna, a conservative/libertarian pro-innovation and pro-free market activist. Khanna was the Congressional staffer who authored a copyright reform brief for the Republican Study Committee (the conservative caucus of House Republicans). The brief was entitled Three Myths about Copyright Law and Where to Start to Fix it, and attacked current copyright law and proposed sweeping, significant changes—reducing statutory damages, expanding fair use, punishing false copyright claims, and significantly limiting copyright terms. The brief was immediately taken down, and Khanna no longer works on Capitol Hill. (See House Republicans: Copyright Law Destroys Markets; It's Time For Real Reform; Heroic and Radical Republican Study Committee Copyright Reform Proposal Retracted under Pressure from MPAA and RIAA, Techdirt Interview With Derek Khanna, Author Of The RSC 'Fix Copyright' Policy Briefing, Republican Study Committee Dumps Derek Khanna, Author Of Copyright Reform Brief, After Members Complain, and Copyright Shill’s Defense of the Status Quo.)Khanna's latest effort was a petition urging the White House to make it legal under copyright law for people to unlock their cell phones. The White House agreed. (See Khanna's article in Forbes.com, White House Comes Out in Favor of Cellphone Unlocking and his National Review Online article, Why the GOP Has to Get Behind Cell-Phone Unlocking; also Derek Khanna: “Taking on real reform in a post-SOPA world – let’s start with cellphone unlocking”; White House Says Mobile Phone Unlocking Should Be Legal; and the TechCrunch piece, How A Fired Republican Staffer Became A Powerful Martyr For Internet Activists.)We discussed these and related technology and IP issues.Follow Khanna at https://twitter.com/DerekKhanna.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 029.This is my appearance on Episode 18 of First Degree Liberty: Ethics with Stephan Kinsella, with hosts Chase Rachels and Michael Martelli. We discussed argumentation ethics and the title-transfer theory of contract, and other issues (originally recorded Mar. 4, 2013; released Mar. 5, 2013).For background on some of the issues discussed, see my articles and posts:Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide New Rationalist Directions in Libertarian Rights Theory A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and InalienabilityJustice and Property Rights: Rothbard on Scarcity, Property, Contracts…

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 028.My old friend Jack Criss (ProBizMS, Ready, Aim, Right!) and I had a discussion reminiscing about how we became friends 25 years ago, our early Objectivist phases, how communication and the movement has changed over the years, his 1980s libertarian radio talk show in Jackson, MS. We touched on many issues including where the liberty movement stands today, optimism vs. cynicism, entrepreneurs and government interference, Ayn Rand's best novel, why politics is futile and much more...

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 027.I was invited to be a guest on The Peter Mac Show in late 2009 and ended up staying on for both hours. It was a pretty in-depth interview. The host asked impressively intelligent questions for someone who had just started coming around to the anti-IP position (after reading my Intellectual Property and Libertarianism just the day before—impressive).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 026.This is FreeDomain Radio episode 2336, in which host Stefan Molyneux and I discussed libertarian aspects of corporations and limited liability law. (Originally recorded Feb. 22, 2013, released by FDR on Feb. 26.)For more on this issue see my Libertarian Standard post Corporate Personhood, Limited Liability, and Double Taxation; and KOL100 | The Role of the Corporation and Limited Liability In a Free Society (PFS 2013).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 025.This is my appearance on Michael Shanklin's Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast with Michael Shanklin (Feb. 26, 2013; originally recorded Feb. 25, 2013). We discussed intellectual property and a few other matters, such as the Ron Paul vs RonPaul.Com dispute, Aaron Swartz, Corporatism, and the like. For the initial discussion of IP and what is wrong with it, I relied on the type of explanation I provide in Intellectual Property Rights as Negative Servitudes.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 024.I previously podcasted my speech from September 2012 at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society in Bodrum, Turkey (KOL001 | "The (State's) Corruption of (Private) Law" (PFS 2012)). Later that day I and the other speakers from that day, including Jeff Tucker and Hans-Hermann Hoppe, participated in a general panel discussion and Q&A session, which is included in this podcast episode.Topics discussed include the issue of preemptive attacks and standing threats, spanking and libertarianism, Gresham's law and law and legislation, strategies for liberty in life and how to avoid corruption in an unfree world. On the latter topic, I talked about the power of attraction and also vocally objecting, speaking out, when hearing statist sentiments from friends, co-workers, etc. There were also questions about how victims of aggression can achieve restitution from the aggressor, what does he have the right to do to the aggressor—issues such as proportionality, punishment, ostracism, and so on.For other speeches at the PFS 2012 meeting, see the links in the Program, or the PFS Vimeo channel.Day 3 Q&A Part 1 from Property & Freedom Society on Vimeo.Day 3 Q&A Part 2 from Property & Freedom Society on Vimeo.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 023.This is lecture 6 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society.”This lecture's topic is "Applications Continued; Common Libertarian Mistakes (Fraud Etc.)," and discusses:Defense of corporations Common libertarian mistakesSelf-ownership Positive obligations FraudFor slides for all six lectures, plus extensive hyperlinked suggested reading material, see this Libertarian Standard post. For a listing of the syllabus and topics covered in each lecture, see this Mises blog post.For more information, see my Mises Daily article "Introduction to Libertarian Legal Theory," and Danny Sanchez's post Study Libertarian Legal Theory Online with Stephan Kinsella.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 022.This is lecture 5 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society.” I'll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast in upcoming days.This lecture's topic is "Intellectual Property and Related," and discusses:Overview of types of IP Origins of IP The nature of property rights, role of scarcity, and the function of the market. Pro-IP arguments: utilitarian and deontological Defamation Free Speech and Property Rights (Rothbard) Proposed Reforms Imagining a post-IP worldFor slides for all six lectures, plus extensive hyperlinked suggested reading material, see this Libertarian Standard post. For a listing of the syllabus and topics covered in each lecture, see this Mises blog post.For more information, see my Mises Daily article "Introduction to Libertarian Legal Theory," and Danny Sanchez's post Study Libertarian Legal Theory Online with Stephan Kinsella.Update: The videos of all six lectures are now available here; the video for this particular lecture is embedded below, plus the Q&A session.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 021.This is lecture 4 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society.” I'll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast in upcoming days.This lecture's topic is "Causation, Aggression, Responsibility," and discusses:Conspiracies and Incitement Strict Liability. Responsibility for Property. “Limitations” on property versus limitations on actionFor slides for all six lectures, plus extensive hyperlinked suggested reading material, see this Libertarian Standard post. For a listing of the syllabus and topics covered in each lecture, see this Mises blog post.For more information, see my Mises Daily article "Introduction to Libertarian Legal Theory," and Danny Sanchez's post Study Libertarian Legal Theory Online with Stephan Kinsella.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 020.This is lecture 3 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society.” I'll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast in upcoming days.This lecture's topic is "Applications I: Legal Systems, Contract, Fraud," and discusses:Legislation and Law The significance of Roman Law Contract Theory“written” agreements Inalienability Breach of contract Debtor’s PrisonFor slides for all six lectures, plus extensive hyperlinked suggested reading material, see this Libertarian Standard post. For a listing of the syllabus and topics covered in each lecture, see this Mises blog post.For more information, see my Mises Daily article "Introduction to Libertarian Legal Theory," and Danny Sanchez's post Study Libertarian Legal Theory Online with Stephan Kinsella.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 019.This is lecture 2 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society.” I'll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast in upcoming days. This lecture's topic is "Libertarian Basics: Rights and Law-Continued," and discusses:Anarcho-libertarianism (cont.) Justice: Punishment and RestitutionThe Case of Threats Stalking Spam Torts and NegligenceLegal Positivism and Logical PositivismFor slides for all six lectures, plus extensive hyperlinked suggested reading material, see this Libertarian Standard post. For a listing of the syllabus and topics covered in each lecture, see this Mises blog post. For more information, see my Mises Daily article "Introduction to Libertarian Legal Theory," and Danny Sanchez's post Study Libertarian Legal Theory Online with Stephan Kinsella.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 018.This is lecture 1 (of 6) of my 2011 Mises Academy course “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society.” I'll release the remaining lectures here in the podcast in upcoming days.This lecture's topic is "Libertarian Basics: Rights and Law," and discusses:Legal Theory and Austrian Economics Scarcity and Property RightsRights as property rightsThe Nature of rightsthe Is-Ought Problem Argumentation Ethics and Estoppel UniversalizabilityEssence of LibertarianismSelf-ownership HomesteadingLockean proviso Labor ownership and mixingAnarcho-libertarianismFor slides for all six lectures, plus extensive hyperlinked suggested reading material, see this Libertarian Standard post. For a listing of the syllabus and topics covered in each lecture, see this Mises blog post.For more information, see my Mises Daily article "Introduction to Libertarian Legal Theory," and Danny Sanchez's post Study Libertarian Legal Theory Online with Stephan Kinsella.)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 017.I was interviewed last night on the Liberty Beat podcast, episode 33 (Sunday, Feb. 17, 2013). Hosts Daniel Benoy, David Shepherd, and Chinaman. We had a nice, long, in-depth discussion about IP, and also the Ron Paul v. ronpaul.com dispute, and other topics as noted below.Notes from the Liberty Beat release: Liberty Beat Podcast - Episode 33 - Stephan KinsellaIntellectual Property Attorney and outspoken libertarian Stephan Kinsella joins us today to give the most eloquent opposition to concept of ‘Intellectual Property’ we’ve ever had on the show. Listen in while we explore the complex distortions created by this destructive system!Topics:State Versus Freedom & Technology Special Guest: Stephan Kinsella Locke-ian Ideas & Intellectual Property Patent & Copyright First Sale Doctrine (Omega v. Costco) Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Chanel & Trademarks WTO Antigua $25m Ideas Who owns the copyrights of a picture? Linking to copyrighted material Aaron Swartz, PACER & JSTOR Copyright & Plagiarism & Trademark Exception to the DMCA Ron Paul & the Domain Name Squatters Dead Space 3 & the farming glitch Contracts of Adhesion

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 016.I appeared last night on Adam vs. the Man (episode 192) to discuss the Ron Paul v. Ronpaul.com dispute. Our segment goes from about 1:30:30 to about 1:54:30, which is excerpted here.Excerpt:Full show:See also:Mike Masnick, Ron Paul, UN Hater, Asks UN To Take RonPaul.com Forcefully From Ron Paul's Biggest Supporters, TechDirt Jeff Tucker and Stefan Molyneux, FreeDomainRadio (Feb. 11, 2013, Youtube, FDR episode 2327) Brad R, DOES RON PAUL OWN HIS NAME?, C4SIF Andrew Ian Dodge, Ron Paul Turns on Grassroots Supports Sites With Help of UN Organization, Huffington Post Nancy Scola, Ron Paul vs. RonPaul.com: How Coalitions Crack Up in the Internet Age, The Atlantic

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 015.YAL interview (October 7, 2009) by Matt Cockerill of Young Americans for Liberty. Our interview covered several topics, such as minarchism vs. anarcho-libertarianism, the non-aggression principle, gay marriage, restitution vs. retribution, intellectual property, and pessimism and activism. (YouTube version)For more on some of these topics, see my posts/articles:California Gay Marriage Law Overturned: What Should Libertarians Think?; Fraud, Restitution, and Retaliation: The Libertarian Approach; IP-related resources at C4SIF; The Trouble with Libertarian Activism; What Libertarianism Is; What It Means To Be an Anarcho-Capitalist; Why I’m a Libertarian — or, Why Libertarianism is Beautiful.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 014.I published a controversial article, New Israel: A Win-Win-Win Proposal, back in 2001 on LewRockwell.com, in which I proposed relocating Israel to U.S. public lands such as Utah or the Anwar area of Alaska. I was interviewed about this topic by the bizarro quasi-libertarian Eric Dondero on Libertarian Politics Live on Aug. 27, 2007 (Israelis vs. Arabs: What’s the solution?).For updates and related articles, see:Israeli TV Decision Picking on Israel–Matthew Bargainer Yet more on “New Israel" Ken Layne, FoxNews.com, How 'Bout Relocating Israel to Mexico? “Fight World War IV” - Or Let Israelis Immigrate?, by Paul Craig Roberts, VDARE Israel's end-times gamble, by Gary DeMar, WorldNetDaily.com Ronald Bailey, “New Exodus: Let Jews leave Europe for America," April 2, 2003 issue of ReasonOnline A Jewish State

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 013.“Intellectual Property and Libertarianism,” speech presented at Mises University 2009 (July 30, 2009; audio; video); speech podcast on The Lew Rockwell Show, #131, as The Intellectual Property Racket (Aug. 19, 2009).This presentation was different than others I've done in the past on IP, partly because, as it for students, I tried to start from the ground up, and also to integrate the proper approach to IP with the essential principles of libertarian political philosophy. Thus part of the talk summarized my view of what libertarianism is, and then applied it to IP; this summary view of the libertarian framework was distilled from a more elaborated version, contained in my What Libertarianism Is. My article "Intellectual Property and Libertarianism," based on this speech, appeared in the December 2009 issue of Liberty (local PDF); an ensuing letters section with discussion between me and some critics can be found in Yeager and Other Letters Re Liberty article “Intellectual Property and Libertarianism”. A version with more detailed endnotes appeared as “Intellectual Property and Libertarianism,” Mises Daily, Nov. 17, 2009.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 012.This is my Rothbard Memorial Lecture at the Mises Institute's Austrian Scholars Conference (2008), “The Intellectual Property Quagmire, or, The Perils of Libertarian Creationism" [Originally entitled Rethinking IP Completely"] (Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn AL, March 13, 2008; Powerpoint; Slideshare.net Presentation; PDF version; Video). [Mises audio](Normal video below seems to be out for now: here is a backup:)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 011.This is an interview I did with Lew Rockwell, from 2008: “Intellectual ‘Property,’” The Lew Rockwell Show (Sept. 24, 2008)

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 010.I appeared recently on Decline to State, discussing Locke, property rights, intellectual property, anarchy, and so on; see KOL009. I also participated in the Aftershow. From their description: Show #39.1: Aftershow for January 23 2013Stephan Kinsella joins us for the aftershow. He answers some listener questions, talks about dispute resolution and contract, and shares his many insights into the liberty movement at large. Enjoy this special bonus content, everyone!Around 3:30, Rudd-O mentions that his having his eyes opened on IP helped him become a full-fledged libertarian/anarchist. It's interesting to me that there are so many paths to liberty: Rand, Read, Bastiat, Milton Friedman, Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Ron Paul, and even IP abolitionism. Amazing.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 009.I appeared recently on Decline to State, discussing Locke, property rights, intellectual property, anarchy, and so on. From their description: Show #39: January 23 2013 with Stephan Kinsella — by The Decline to State team — last modified Jan 29, 2013 02:15 PMThe Decline to State team sits down with patent lawyer and libertarian author Stephan Kinsella. We delve deep into the roots of property rights - where do they come from? Was Locke wrong? Why is intellectual property fundamentally different from normal property? How long does it take Decline to State to bring up bitcoins? Listen to find out answers to these perplexing questions! The Aftershow appears in KOL010.One interesting thing we discuss is the fact that in libertarian discussions nowadays, it's only a matter of time before Bitcoin comes up—or, in my case, intellectual property. Sort of a libertarian version of Godwin's Law. So it was funny that after this was discussed, we went for a long stretch avoiding both topics, until I called to the hosts' attention that we had succeeded in doing this.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 008.This is an audiobook version of my Against Intellectual Property (1 hr 54 min.); .mp3 format or .m4b iTunes book format (each about 57M); also available in a Mises.org version and on iTunes U. Narrated by Jock Coats.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 007.This is an audio version of my article What It Means To Be an Anarcho-Capitalist, January 20, 2004, LewRockwell.com (narrated by yours truly).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 006.This is an audio version of my article How We Come To Own Ourselves, Mises Daily (Sep. 7, 2006) (Mises.org blog discussion; narrated by Graham Wright).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 005.This is an audio version of my article, “What Libertarianism Is,” Mises Daily (August 21, 2009) (narrated by Graham Wright). The article was originally published in Hülsmann & Kinsella, eds., Property, Freedom, and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Mises Institute, 2009).

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 004.My longtime friend Walter Block was recently in town, and while we visited had several discussions on libertarian theory, as we usually do when we see each other. He agreed to let me record a discussion on one of the few issues we do not completely agree on: voluntary slavery; we recorded this last night. Walter believes voluntary slavery contracts ought to be enforceable in a private law society, and in this I believe he is in the minority of libertarians (with Nozick, say). We touched on a variety of issues, including debtor's prison, how acquisition of body-rights differs from Lockean homesteading, and the like.Some of my writing relevant to this topic and our discussion include:A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability, Journal of Libertarian Studies 17, no. 2 (Spring 2003): 11-37 Inalienability and Punishment: A Reply to George Smith, Winter 1998-99, Journal of Libertarian Studies. How We Come To Own Ourselves, Mises Daily (Sep. 7, 2006) (Mises.org blog discussion; audio version) Causation and Aggression (co-authored with Patrick Tinsley), The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, vol. 7, no. 4 (winter 2004): 97-112Walter's articles on this topic include:Toward a Libertarian Theory of Inalienability: A Critique of Rothbard, Barnett, Gordon, Smith, Kinsella and Epstein, Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 17, No. 2, Spring 2003, pp. 39-85 “Alienability: Reply to Kuflik,” Humanomics. Vol. 23, No. 3, 2007, pp. 117-136 “Are Alienability and the Apriori of Argument Logically Incompatible?” Dialogue, Vol. 1, No. 1. 2004. Alienability, Inalienability, Paternalism and the Law: Reply to Kronman American Journal of Criminal Law, Vol. 28, No. 3, Summer 2001, pp. 351-371 Market Inalienability Once Again: Reply to Radin Thomas Jefferson Law Journal, Vol. 22, No. 1, Fall 1999, pp. 37-88 Alienability, Inalienability, Paternalism and the Law: Reply to Kronman

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 003.I was interviewed recently by my friend and The Libertarian Standard co-blogger, libertarian philosopher Geoffrey Allan Plauché, and Matthew Alexander for the inaugural episode of their new Prometheus Unbound Podcast. I'm posting here as KOL episode 003. Since we discussed IP and Geoff and Matthew are both fellow anti-IP anarcho-libertarians, I'm sure they won't mind! ;) Prometheus Unbound is an original, well-done, and excellent "webzine featuring news, reviews, interviews, and commentary on speculative fiction and literature from a libertarian perspective." Libertarians and others who enjoy sci-fi, fantasy, literature, etc. should subscribe to their podcast feed.Here's an excerpt from Geoff's blog post announcing PUP001.PUP001 | Interview with Stephan Kinsella by GEOFFREY ALLAN PLAUCHÉ on JANUARY 24, 2013 @ 11:57 AM · 0 COMMENTSAt long last, here is the first episode of our new, original podcast.First, Matthew and I break the ice by briefly talking about what we’ve been reading recently. I had just finished Kameron Hurley’s debut novel God’s War. Overall, I think it’s a good effort with an interesting story and world-building but is not without its flaws. Matthew had recently finished Live Free or Die by John Ringo. It was a 2011 Prometheus Award finalist, not a winner as I mistakenly thought while recording the podcast and, according to Matthew, didn’t deserve to be.Our interview with Stephan takes up most of the episode. It’s around 53 minutes long and starts 9:40 minutes in. For those who don’t already know him, Stephan Kinsella is a patent attorney and prominent libertarian legal scholar. He is best known for his opposition to intellectual property.We invited Stephan on the show to discuss the problems of intellectual property and piracy in the Digital Age. But first we had to ask him about his love of science fiction and fantasy. We got him to mention some of his favorite authors and books (see below for a list), and we even talked about the Hobbit movie for a bit.Then, at about 23:15 in, we dove into the meat of the interview. Stephan explained the historical origin of copyright (censorship) and patents (government grants of monopoly privilege, which is what copyright is now too really), how intellectual property has shaped and distorted the film and publishing industries, including Hollywood’s move to California to avoid patent disputes, and why reform is not enough. We also discussed how the Digital Age — the age of the internet, smartphone, ereader, and globalization — is making the evils of copyright and patents more obvious and acute while at the same time undermining traditional business models built around intellectual property. And finally, we explore ways artistic creators might earn a living in a world without intellectual property laws.Read more>>[local download link]

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 002.A reading of one of my earlier IP articles by Ian Freeman on Free Talk Live, from the 8/31/07 show [FTL audio; starts around 5:25]. The article is "Do patents and copyrights undermine private property?: Yes," Insight magazine, May 21, 2001 (containing a response by CEI's James DeLong).[As noted in the first episode, I will occasionally include in the feed older material such as interviews, speeches, and readings of various publications, interleaved between newer episodes.]

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 001.I delivered this speech in September 2012 for the 2012 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society in Bodrum, Turkey. The audio of my speech was corrupted due to a technical error, so I re-recorded a version of the speech; audio and streaming below. For others, see the links in the Program, or the PFS Vimeo channel. Other speeches will be uploaded presently.(This is the inaugural entry to my new podcast, Kinsella on Liberty.)The talk was largely based on two previous papers:“Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer 1995), p. 132. ((Note: 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 review above, 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.)) Condensed version: Legislation and Law in a Free Society,” Mises Daily (Feb. 25, 2010)Update: see also Is English Common Law Libertarian? (Powerpoint; PDF)[PFS; TLS]