Kinsella On Liberty

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

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

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 079. 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 Kinsella September 13, 2013 In this inaugural edition of the Lions of Liberty Podcast, host Marc Clair interviews libertarian legal scholar Stephan Kinsella about the concept of intellectual property and the libertarian framework. Lions of Liberty Podcast, Ep. 1: Stephan Kinsella Finally! The long-anticipated Lions of Liberty Podcast has arrived! In this first episode, I spoke with Stephan Kinsella regarding the subject of intellectual property within the libertarian framework.  Kinsella is the author of Against Intellectual Property, and is one of the best-known voices in the libertarian community against the concept of intellectual property.   I found the conversation with Kinsella very interesting and I feel it will be helpful not only for those trying to sort out a stance on intellectual property, but also for those new to libertarian ideas in sorting out some of the finer details of a libertarian framework. Before launching into tirades about “private property” and “contracts”, it’s important to have a firm grasp on the definitions of these terms. I first came to the IP debate through the “debate” between Kinsella and Robert Wenzel on the issue, which served more as car-crash entertainment than an intellectual study. But it did peak my interest in an area I had honestly not given much thought to before. After reading his book and speaking further with him on the issue, I find it difficult to present a case in favor of intellectual property, at least as we know the concept today. The biggest problem I see with intellectual property is that it attempts to bind third parties, not privy to any sort of contract, and prohibit them from using their own property in a way they see fit. I tend to agree with Kinsella’s view that intellectual property is nothing more than the State’s granting of a monopoly on an idea or a pattern of ideas. The biggest difference between Kinsella and myself is that I may see a private society, sans the State, as coming up with more ways to protect their works through contracts and/or user agreements, but ultimately that can only go so far. Any differences we may have on just how far private arrangements to protect the work of artists may go are largely moot. When it comes to forming a libertarian position on a subject, we should not be asking “how will this work?” but “what is right?” Your feedback is welcome and encouraged! This is my first attempt at conducting an interview or producing a podcast, so I promise I won’t be offended. Drop me an email at 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 Students Our previous discussions: KOL 043 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Bitcoin, Legal Reform, Morality of Voting, Rothbard on Copyright  and KOL 025 | Triple-V: Voluntary Virtues Vodcast, with Michael Shanklin: Intellectual Property, Ron Paul vs RonPaul.Com, Aaron Swartz, Corporatism.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 074. This is my interview from The Libertarian, 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 Is I 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.