Kinsella On Liberty (Stephan Kinsella)

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 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 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 172. This is the first of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (Tuesdays, Mar. 22–April 26, 2011), which was a reprise of a similar Mises Academy course in October 2010. The slides and video for this lecture, as well as the “suggested readings” for all six lectures of the course are provided below. The other five lectures follow in subsequent podcast episodes KOL173–177. (Discussed in Rethinking IP; and on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course. See also “Rethinking IP,” Mises Daily (Feb. 10, 2011).) See also my article "Rethinking IP," Mises Daily (Feb. 10, 2011). GROK SHOWNOTES: In this first lecture of a five-part Mises Academy course from 2011, titled “Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics,” libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella provides a comprehensive overview of the historical and legal foundations of intellectual property (IP), focusing on patents and copyrights, while setting the stage for his libertarian critique (0:00-10:00). Kinsella begins by introducing the course structure and his anti-IP stance, rooted in Austrian economics, and traces the origins of patents to medieval European monopolies, such as the 1474 Venetian Patent Act, and copyrights to censorship-driven printing privileges in England, culminating in the 1710 Statute of Anne (10:01-25:00). He explains the legal mechanics of IP, including patent and copyright durations, infringement processes, and their economic implications, emphasizing their role as state-granted monopolies that restrict competition (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s historical analysis frames IP as a product of statism, not market principles, laying the groundwork for his argument that IP violates property rights. Kinsella delves into specific historical examples, such as the U.S. Constitution’s IP clause and early patent cases, to illustrate how IP laws evolved to favor corporate interests and entrench monopolistic privileges (40:01-55:00). He critiques the utilitarian justification for IP, noting that empirical evidence, like studies showing minimal innovation benefits, undermines claims that patents and copyrights are necessary for progress (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on topics like the differences between patents, copyrights, and trademarks, the role of IP in pharmaceuticals, and libertarian alternatives to IP, reinforcing his view that a free market thrives without such restrictions (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by previewing the course’s upcoming lectures on IP theory and economics, urging listeners to question the legitimacy of IP as a state-imposed barrier to innovation (1:25:01-1:25:38). This lecture is a thorough introduction to IP’s historical and legal roots, ideal for those seeking a libertarian perspective on the subject. Transcript and detailed Grok summary below. Related Material Youtube playlist for all 6 lectures This course was discussed in “Rethinking IP,” Mises Daily (Feb. 10, 2011), and on the Mises Blog in Study with Kinsella Online and in Rethinking Intellectual Property: Kinsella’s Mises Academy Online Course. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail here. This course followed an earlier presentation in 2010; see "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," Mises Daily (Oct. 22, 2010; archived comments), and "Understanding IP: An Interview with Stephan Kinsella," Mises Daily (Oct. 21, 2010, with Jeffrey A. Tucker) (Transcript of Understanding IP: An Interview with Stephan Kinsella (2010)). Lecture 1 from the 2010 course is here. Introductory video from the Mises Blog post Kinsella Can Be Your Professor: Lecture 1: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN HISTORY  GROK DETAILED SUMMARY

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 173. This is the second of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011). The first lecture may be found in KOL172. GROK SHOWNOTES: In this second lecture of the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella delves into the sources, justifications, and types of intellectual property (IP), building on the historical and legal foundations covered in Lecture 1 (0:00-10:00). Kinsella outlines the main justifications for IP—utilitarian, labor/desert, personality, and natural rights—critiquing each through a libertarian lens rooted in Austrian economics, arguing that IP creates artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas, violating property rights (10:01-25:00). He uses examples like a cake recipe to illustrate that knowledge guides action without needing ownership and examines the legal distinctions between patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets, emphasizing their reliance on state enforcement (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s analysis frames IP as a statist intervention that distorts markets and stifles innovation. Kinsella further critiques the utilitarian claim that IP incentivizes innovation, citing empirical studies showing minimal benefits and significant costs, such as litigation and barriers to competition (40:01-55:00). He explores alternative justifications, like the labor theory of property, debunking the idea that creators inherently own their ideas, and discusses practical implications, such as IP’s role in pharmaceuticals and software (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on topics like the feasibility of contractual IP alternatives, the moral arguments for IP, and its cultural impacts, reinforcing his call for IP abolition to foster a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by previewing future lectures on IP theory and economics, urging listeners to reject IP as a violation of libertarian principles (1:25:01-1:25:47). This lecture is a rigorous theoretical critique, ideal for those exploring the philosophical underpinnings of IP from a libertarian perspective. Youtube and slides for this lecture are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail at KOL172. The “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172. Transcript and Grok Detailed Summary below. Lecture 2: OVERVIEW OF JUSTIFICATIONS FOR IP; PROPERTY, SCARCITY, AND IDEAS GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s second lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" examines the sources, justifications, and types of intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents, copyrights, and other IP forms are incompatible with libertarian property rights. Rooted in Austrian economics, Kinsella critiques IP’s philosophical foundations and practical harms, advocating for its abolition. The 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, builds on Lecture 1’s historical focus with a deep dive into theory. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Lecture Overview (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces Lecture 2, focusing on IP’s sources, justifications, and types, linking to Lecture 1. IP Justifications: Utilitarian and Labor (10:01-25:00): Critiques utilitarian and labor/desert arguments for IP, arguing they misapply to non-scarce ideas. IP Types and Legal Mechanics (25:01-40:00): Examines patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets, highlighting their state-enforced nature.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 174. This is the third of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011). The first lecture may be found in KOL172. GROK SHOWNOTES: In the third lecture of the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella focuses on the theoretical objections to intellectual property (IP), particularly patents and copyrights, arguing they fundamentally conflict with libertarian property rights and free-market principles (0:00-10:00). Kinsella builds on Lectures 1 and 2 by reiterating that property rights apply only to scarce, rivalrous resources, not non-scarce ideas, using examples like a patented mousetrap to illustrate how IP restricts owners’ use of their physical property (10:01-25:00). He critiques key pro-IP arguments—utilitarian, natural rights, and labor-based—asserting they misapply property concepts to ideas, creating artificial monopolies that stifle innovation and competition (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s libertarian framework, grounded in Austrian economics, emphasizes that IP is a state-imposed violation of natural rights, redistributing property from original owners to IP holders. Kinsella further explores the philosophical flaws of IP, debunking the notion that creation or labor justifies ownership of ideas, using a marble statue example to show that property rights stem from first use, not creative effort (40:01-55:00). He addresses the practical harms of IP, such as high litigation costs and barriers to innovation, particularly in pharmaceuticals and software, and contrasts these with IP-free industries like open-source software that thrive on competition (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella responds to audience questions on topics like contractual alternatives to IP, the role of trade secrets, and IP’s cultural impacts, reinforcing his call for abolition to foster a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by previewing the remaining lectures on IP’s economic and reform issues, urging listeners to reject IP as a statist distortion that impoverishes society (1:25:01-1:25:26). This lecture is a compelling theoretical critique, ideal for those seeking a libertarian perspective on IP’s philosophical underpinnings. Youtube, slides, transcript, and Grok Detailed Summary for this lecture are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail at KOL172. The “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172. Transcript below. Lecture 3: EXAMINING THE UTILITARIAN CASE FOR IP GROK DETAILED SHOWNOTES Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s third lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" dives into the theoretical objections to intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents and copyrights violate libertarian property rights by imposing artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas. Rooted in Austrian economics, Kinsella critiques pro-IP arguments and their practical harms, advocating for IP abolition. The 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, builds on Lectures 1 (history) and 2 (justifications) with a focus on theory. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Lecture Context (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces Lecture 3, focusing on theoretical objections to IP, linking to prior lectures. Property Rights and Scarcity (10:01-25:00): Argues that property rights apply to scarce resources, not ideas, showing IP’s conflict with libertarianism. Critique of Pro-IP Arguments (25:01-40:00): Debunks utilita...

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 175. This is the fourth of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011). The first lecture may be found in KOL172. GROK SHOWNOTES: In the fourth lecture of the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella provides a detailed examination of the statutes, case law, and international treaties that govern intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets are state-enforced monopolies incompatible with libertarian property rights (0:00-10:00). Kinsella traces the evolution of U.S. IP laws, such as the Patent Act of 1790 and Copyright Act of 1790, to their English predecessors like the 1623 Statute of Monopolies and 1710 Statute of Anne, critiquing their origins in royal privileges and their role in restricting market competition (10:01-25:00). He outlines the legal mechanics of IP, including patent and copyright durations, infringement processes, and remedies like injunctions, emphasizing their economic distortions and anti-competitive effects (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s analysis positions IP as a statist intervention that undermines the free market’s ability to foster innovation. Kinsella explores international IP treaties, such as the 1883 Paris Convention and 1886 Berne Convention, which standardize IP protections globally but entrench corporate monopolies, particularly in pharmaceuticals and technology (40:01-55:00). He critiques IP’s practical harms, including high litigation costs, barriers to innovation, and cultural restrictions, contrasting these with IP-free industries like open-source software that thrive on competition (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on abolishing IP, the role of trade secrets, and IP’s impact on global trade, reinforcing his argument that IP is a net harm to society and should be abolished to promote a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by previewing the final lecture on IP’s economic effects and reform possibilities, urging listeners to reject IP as a violation of libertarian principles (1:25:01-1:25:47). This lecture is a thorough legal critique, ideal for understanding IP’s statutory and global frameworks from a libertarian perspective. Transcript below. Youtube and slides for this lecture are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail at KOL172. The “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 RIGHTS GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s fourth lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" focuses on the statutes, case law, and international treaties governing intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets are state-enforced monopolies that violate libertarian property rights. Rooted in Austrian economics, Kinsella critiques IP’s legal frameworks and their economic and cultural harms, advocating for its abolition. The 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, builds on prior lectures with a legal focus. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Lecture Overview (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces Lecture 4, focusing on IP statutes, case law, and treaties, linking to prior lectures. U.S. IP Statutes and Origins (10:01-25:00): Details U.S.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 176. This is the fifth of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011). The first lecture may be found in KOL172. GROK SHOWNOTES: In the fifth and final lecture of the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella examines rights-based arguments for intellectual property (IP), particularly patents and copyrights, arguing they fundamentally conflict with libertarian property rights by imposing artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas (0:00-10:00). Kinsella recaps the course’s prior lectures, emphasizing that property rights apply only to scarce, rivalrous resources to resolve conflicts, and critiques rights-based justifications—natural rights, labor/desert, and creation-based claims—using examples like a patented mousetrap to show how IP restricts owners’ use of their physical property (10:01-25:00). He argues that IP is a state-enforced monopoly that redistributes property rights, stifling innovation and competition, and contrasts this with the free market’s reliance on emulation and knowledge sharing (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s lecture, rooted in Austrian economics, frames IP as a philosophical and practical violation of liberty. Kinsella further debunks the notion that creators have a natural right to their ideas, using a marble statue example to clarify that property stems from first use, not labor or creation, and explores IP’s practical harms, such as high litigation costs and barriers in pharmaceuticals and software (40:01-55:00). He discusses alternatives like trade secrets and market incentives, citing open-source software as evidence of innovation without IP, and critiques IP’s cultural distortions, like limiting artistic remixing (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on contractual IP alternatives, moral objections, and strategies for IP abolition, reinforcing his call for a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by summarizing the course’s case against IP, urging listeners to reject it as a statist intervention and embrace intellectual freedom for prosperity (1:25:01-1:25:33). This lecture is a compelling capstone, blending theory and practical insights for those challenging IP’s legitimacy. Youtube and slides for this lecture are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail at KOL172. The “suggested readings” for the entire course are provided in the notes for KOL172. Transcript and Grok detailed shownotes below. Lecture 5: PROPERTY, SCARCITY, AND IDEAS; EXAMINING RIGHTS-BASED ARGUMENTS FOR IP  GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s fifth lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" focuses on rights-based arguments for intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents and copyrights violate libertarian property rights by creating artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas. Rooted in Austrian economics, Kinsella critiques natural rights, labor/desert, and creation-based justifications, advocating for IP abolition. The 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, concludes the course with a theoretical and practical case against IP. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for approximately 5-15 minute blocks, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Course Recap (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces Lecture 5, recapping the course and focusing on rights-based IP arguments. Property Rights and Scarcity (10:01-25:00): Argues property rights apply to scarce resources, not ideas, showing IP’s conflict with libertarianism.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 177. This is the final of six lectures of my 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics" (originally presented Tuesdays, Mar. 22-April 26, 2011). The first lecture may be found in KOL172. GROK SUMMARY: In the sixth and final lecture of the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella concludes his comprehensive critique of intellectual property (IP), focusing on the economic consequences of patents and copyrights and exploring reform possibilities from a libertarian perspective (0:00-10:00). Kinsella recaps the course’s arguments, emphasizing that IP creates artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas, violating property rights and distorting markets, and uses examples like pharmaceutical patents to illustrate how IP raises costs and limits access (10:01-25:00). He critiques the economic rationale for IP, citing studies that show minimal innovation benefits and significant costs, such as litigation and barriers to competition, and argues that IP-free markets, like open-source software, demonstrate robust innovation through competition and first-mover advantages (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s lecture, grounded in Austrian economics, frames IP as a statist intervention that impoverishes society. Kinsella explores reform options, from outright abolition to incremental changes like shortening patent terms, but argues that abolition is the only consistent libertarian position, as partial reforms perpetuate IP’s core flaws (40:01-55:00). He addresses IP’s cultural and social impacts, such as copyrights stifling artistic creativity, and discusses alternatives like trade secrets and market incentives, citing examples like J.K. Rowling’s success without needing IP (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella responds to audience questions on transitioning to an IP-free world, the role of global treaties, and IP’s moral justifications, reinforcing his call for a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by summarizing the course’s case against IP, urging listeners to reject it as a violation of liberty and embrace intellectual freedom for economic and cultural prosperity (1:25:01-1:26:07). This lecture is a powerful conclusion, blending economic analysis and libertarian principles for those challenging IP’s legitimacy. Youtube, slides, transcript, and Grok detailed summary for the this lecture are provided below. The course and other matters are discussed in further detail at KOL172. The “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. CLOSED GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s sixth lecture in the 2011 Mises Academy course "Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics," delivered in 2011, concludes with a focus on the economic consequences of intellectual property (IP) and reform possibilities. As a libertarian patent attorney, Kinsella argues that patents and copyrights impose artificial scarcity, violate property rights, and harm innovation, advocating for their abolition. The 86-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, synthesizes the course’s historical, theoretical, and legal critiques, using Austrian economics to propose a free market of ideas. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for approximately 5-15 minute blocks, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Course Recap (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces Lecture 6, recapping the course and focusing on IP’s economic impacts and reform.

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 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 181. I discussed argumentation ethics with Tom Woods on his show today: Ep. 370 It Is Impossible to Argue Against Libertarianism Without Contradiction By Tom Woods / March 31, 2015 / Podcast Stephan Kinsella discusses the argumentation ethics of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, who argues that only libertarian norms can be argumentatively. READ MORE Tom 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 Hoppe Update: 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 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 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 2015 Also: 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 2015 Stephan Kinsella Meets Adam Kokesh at Porcfest 2015   Stephan Kinsella Meets Derrick J Host Of Flaming Freedom at Porcfest 2015 Larken 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 Style Porcfest 2015 Talk Stephan Kinsella, Ganine Van Alst, Daniel Rothschild, Evan Isaac, Eliza Sprague   Friday, June 26 • 10:30am - 11:20am Anarchism, for and against: a debate Sign up or log in to save this event to your list and see who's attending! TweetShare Does 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. Moderators David 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 → Speakers Stephan 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 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). GROK SHOWNOTES: In this provocative lecture delivered at PorcFest 2015, titled “Intellectual Property is the Root of All Evil,” libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella argues that intellectual property (IP) laws, specifically patents and copyrights, are fundamentally anti-libertarian, creating artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas and violating natural property rights (0:00-10:00). Kinsella, leveraging Austrian economics, explains that property rights apply only to scarce, rivalrous resources to resolve conflicts, using examples like a patented mousetrap to show how IP restricts individuals from using their own property (10:01-25:00). He critiques IP’s historical roots in state monopolies, such as the 1623 Statute of Monopolies and 1710 Statute of Anne, and its practical harms, like stifling innovation and raising costs in industries such as pharmaceuticals (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s bold claim frames IP as a root cause of economic and cultural distortions, undermining the free market’s ability to foster prosperity. Kinsella debunks common pro-IP arguments, including the utilitarian notion that IP incentivizes innovation and the labor-based claim that creators deserve monopolies, citing IP-free markets like open-source software as evidence of robust competition-driven innovation (40:01-55:00). He explores IP’s broader impacts, such as copyrights limiting artistic expression and patents creating barriers in technology, and discusses alternatives like trade secrets and market incentives (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on transitioning to an IP-free world, the role of global IP treaties, and moral objections to IP, reinforcing his call for abolition to enable a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by urging libertarians to reject IP as a state-enforced evil, advocating for intellectual freedom to drive economic and cultural flourishing (1:25:01-1:25:43). This lecture is a fiery and accessible critique, perfect for those exploring libertarian arguments against IP. Transcript and Grok Detailed Summary below 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) Grok Detailed Summary Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s KOL184 podcast, recorded at PorcFest 2015 in June 2015, is a lecture titled “Intellectual Property is the Root of All Evil.” As a libertarian patent attorney, Kinsella argues that IP laws—patents and copyrights—are state-enforced monopolies that violate property rights, stifle innovation, and distort markets and culture. Rooted in Austrian economics, the 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, critiques IP’s philosophical, historical, and practical flaws, advocating for its abolition to enable a free market of ideas. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for approximately 5-15 minute blocks, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and IP’s Illegitimacy (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces the lecture, framing IP as a state-enforced evil that contradicts libertarian principles. Property Rights and Scarcity (10:01-25:00): Argues property rights apply to scarce resources, not ideas, showing IP’s violation of natural rights. Historical Roots and Economic Harms (25:01-40:00): Traces IP to state monopolies and details its ec...

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 185. From a Liberty.me seminar from July 14, 2014. Clarifying Libertarian Theory with Stephan Kinsella Everyone 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 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 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. Youtube below as well as the auto-transcript generated by Youtube: https://youtu.be/FtfP4KxBYcM Update: See also Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society.   Anarchast Ep. 51 with Stephan Kinsella   Jeff Berwick in Acapulco, Mexico, talks with Stephan Kinsella in Houston, Texas Topics 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 it Stephan is doing astounding work in libertarian legal theory you can find more in formation on his sites https://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 Youtube transcript: 0:05 is in our nest 0:15 hi everybody welcome to another edition of Anna Castro for anarchy on the Internet I'm sitting in my living room 0:22 of a house that I live in in Acapulco Mexico right now an...

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 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 Storey's book The Uniqueness of Western Law: A Reactionary Manifesto Storey, THE ‘REACTIONARY’ LIBERTARIANISM OF FRANK VAN DUN  

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). Also available as PFP143 (which contains the official audio instead of the iPhone audio). GROK SHOWNOTES: In this lecture delivered at the Property and Freedom Society’s 10th Annual Meeting in Bodrum, Turkey, on September 13, 2015, titled “On Life without Patents and Copyright: Or, But Who Would Pick the Cotton?” (KOL190), libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella argues that intellectual property (IP) laws, specifically patents and copyrights, are state-enforced monopolies that violate natural property rights and hinder innovation (0:00-10:00). Kinsella, using Austrian economics, explains that property rights apply only to scarce, rivalrous resources, not non-scarce ideas, and illustrates with examples like pharmaceutical patents that raise prices and limit access (10:01-25:00). He traces IP’s origins to historical monopolies, such as the 1623 Statute of Monopolies and 1710 Statute of Anne, and critiques their role in enabling censorship and economic distortions, arguing that abolishing IP would eliminate these harms and foster a freer market (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s provocative title challenges the notion that IP is necessary for innovation, likening it to outdated justifications for slavery. Kinsella debunks pro-IP arguments, including the utilitarian claim that IP incentivizes innovation, citing empirical studies showing minimal benefits and significant costs like litigation, and highlights IP-free industries like open-source software as thriving through competition (40:01-55:00). He explores IP’s cultural impacts, such as copyrights stifling artistic creativity, and discusses alternatives like trade secrets and market incentives, using J.K. Rowling’s success to show creators can prosper without IP (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience concerns about transitioning to an IP-free world, the role of global treaties, and moral objections, reinforcing his call for IP abolition to enable a vibrant, free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by urging libertarians to reject IP as a statist tool, advocating for intellectual freedom to drive economic and cultural prosperity (1:25:01-1:26:30). This lecture is a compelling libertarian critique, blending theory and practical insights for those questioning IP’s necessity. TRANSCRIPT and Grok Detailed Summary below Update: See KOL190 | Part 2: On Life without Patents and Copyright: Or, But Who Would Pick the Cotton? — Panel Discussion, Hoppe, Dürr, Kinsella, van Dun, Daniels (PFS 2015). Transcript below. 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). Grok Detailed Summary Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s KOL190 podcast, recorded at the Property and Freedom Society’s 2015 meeting in Bodrum, Turkey, is a lecture titled “On Life Without Patents and Copyright.” As a libertarian patent attorney, Kinsella argues that IP laws—patents and copyrights—are state-enforced monopolies that violate property rights, stifle innovation, and distort markets and culture. Rooted in Austrian economics, the 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, critiques IP’s philosophical, historical, and practical flaws, envisioning a thriving market without IP. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for approximately 5-15 minute blocks, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Vision Without IP (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces the lecture,

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 prestonbyrne Portugal Tax Authorities Clarify That Buying Or Selling Cryptocurrency Is Tax-Free In the be-careful-what-you-wish-for dept., see NOW THAT BITCOIN IS CONSIDERED PROPERTY IN THE UK, RECLAIMING RANSOMED ASSETS SENT TO EXCHANGES IS MUCH EASIER See also: KOL085 | The History, Meaning, and Future of Legal Tender Episode video: Full video 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 Covered The 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 follows in the next episode. Episode video below: Full video of all 3 parts here:

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 Tender Episode video below: Full video of all three parts below.

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 195. This is my appearance on the The 21st Century Anarchist Podcast Ep. 038: IP with Stephan Kinsella, with host Hermann Morris: "An introduction to intellectual property law and how it relates to libertarianism." Youtube:

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 197. I discussed Rothbardian/libertarian contract theory with Tom Woods on his show today. Update: See also Łukasz Dominiak & Tate Fegley, "Contract Theory, Title Transfer, and Libertarianism," Diametros (10 Sep. 2022; doi: 10.33392/diam.180) Transcript below. Ep. 547 The Central Rothbard Contribution I Overlooked, and Why It Matters Youtube: 3rd December 2015 Stephan 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 Transcript The Central Rothbard Contribution I Overlooked, and Why It Matters: The Rothbard-Evers Title-Transfer Theory of Contract Stephan Kinsella, interviewed by Tom Woods The Tom Woods Show, Ep. 547, Dec. 3, 2015 Transcript 00:00:00 TOM WOODS: The Tom Woods Show, episode 547. 00:00:03 INTRO: Prepare to set fire to the index card of allowable opinion.  Your daily dose of liberty education starts here, the Tom Woods Show. 00:00:14 TOM WOODS: Hey everybody.  Christmas is coming, and chances are you’re going to be doing a lot of online shopping.  Well, why not get cash back at virtually all the retailers you’re going to be using anyway?  Sign up for Ebates and you’ll get just that.  Check it out through tomwoods.com/ebates. 00:00:30 Hey everybody.  Welcome to another episode of the Tom Woods Show.  We’re joined once again by Stephan Kinsella because today we’re talking about foundational issues related to libertarianism, and I can think of no one better to help us clarify our thinking on questions like this than Stephan.  And ordinarily, as I would do in these episodes and as I’ve done in the past with Stephan, I would launch into a biographical discussion of the guest.  But instead, I’m going to turn things over to Stephan and say, Stephan, what do you think people should know about you? 00:01:02 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Well, I was born in a little town in Louisiana. 00:01:06 TOM WOODS: I knew I shouldn’t have done this. 00:01:07 STEPHAN KINSELLA: I’m a libertarian patent attorney in Houston.  How about that? 00:01:12 TOM WOODS: Oh, but you’ve done so much more.  I want to know about your writings. 00:01:16 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Okay, so I am a practicing attorney, but I’ve written a lot on libertarian legal theory for the Journal of Libertarian Studies, and then I founded sort of a successor journal called Libertarian Papers, which is still ongoing, which I’m the managing editor of.  And I’ve written some books, and I’ve written on intellectual property, both the legal side and the libertarian theory side. 00:01:42 TOM WOODS: I am going to be linking to everything that we talk about today in terms of articles that you’ve writt...

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 Rights The video is streamed below.

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! Transcript below. Youtube version: More description from Tom's shownotes: 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 Risk For 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 (2) 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 Transcript The State's Corruption of Private Law, or We Don't Need No Legislature Stephan Kinsella, interviewed by Tom Woods The Tom Woods Show, Dec. 17, 2015 Transcript 00:00:00 TOM WOODS: The Tom Woods Show, episode 557. 00:00:03 INTRO: Prepare to set fire to the index card of allowable opinion.  Your daily dose of liberty education starts here, the Tom Woods Show. 00:00:13 TOM WOODS: Hey everybody.  Welcome to another episode of the show.  Stephan Kinsella is back with us again.  There are so many episode topics I could cover with Stephan Kinsella, and today we’re talking about law and legislation.  Is it possible to think of law other than as something that’s imposed from the top down by a bunch of legislators on society?  That’s what we want to talk about because it’s important, has important ramifications, and I thought I haven’t done it yet.  Doggone it; it’s episode 557.  Let’s do it. 00:00:48 Stephan Kinsella is a libertarian legal theorist.  He has pioneered in the study of intellectual property.  I’m going to link to all kinds of material about Stephan at tomwoods.com/557.  You can find out more about him at stephankinsella.com.  Let me remind you because there’s been a little bit of confusion.  I am giving away a free autographed book.  You can look through my book selection at tomwoods.com/books.  I am giving away a free autographed and personalized book to people who buy gift subscriptions to libertyclassroom.com this year, only for gift subscriptions. 00:01:28 It’s like when you go to Chili’s, which I don’t recommend, but if you go to Chili’s and you buy a $25 gift card, they give you a $5 gift card, it’s that kind of principle.

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 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 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 2016  It’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 Zwolinski See 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 203. This is a Libertarianism Q&A I did using the new Facebook Mentions "Live Video" feature (from this Facebook post; Facebook Live Video; Jan. 11, 2016). I fielded a few questions on various topics, e.g. verbal threats as assault, assault and battery, causality, praxeology, etc. Older, audio-only youtube. 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 Aggression Facebook Live Video below: // < ![CDATA[ (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.3"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); // ]]> Libertarian Theory Q&A Posted by Stephan Kinsella on Monday, January 11, 2016

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 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. [RIP; rip] 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 206. [Transcript below] 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 Aggression Positive rights and libertarianism: How We Come To Own Ourselves Objectivists on Positive Parental Obligations and Abortion Loser 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) 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) ❧ Transcript [not yet edited] Tom Woods Show: Five Mistakes Libertarians Make Stephan Kinsella and Tom Woods, "Tom Woods Show: Five Mistakes Libertarians Make," StephanKinsella.com (Feb. 12, 2016) 00:00:00 TOM WOODS: The Tom Woods Show, episode 592. 00:00:03 INTRO: Prepare to set fire to the index card of allowable opinion.  Your daily dose of liberty education starts here, the Tom Woods Show. 00:00:14 TOM WOODS: Hey everybody.  Welcome to another episode of the show.  Talking to Stephan Kinsella today because he’s just – he’s got one of those sharp, sharp minds.  He thinks clearly.  He writes clearly.  He writes and speaks very precisely.  He helps to clarify my own thinking, and I thought we’d talk about some areas of libertarian thought or some questions where we’re liable to get off track or get confused or maybe not really know what the right libertarian answer is.  So it’s always fun to talk to Stephan who is a libertarian legal theorist.  He is the author of Against Intellectual Property and many articles that are of importance in libertarian theory.  We’ll be linking, of course, to his material and his contact information at tomwoods.com/592. 00:01:09 Now, let me tell you one quick thing.  I don’t know why this happens, but one episode out of 100 the recording software I use just fails completely, and you have no warning that it’s going to fail.  It’s recording perfectly fine.  You can catch the clock going, and then boom, no recording when you’re all done.  It’s Pamela, by the way, Pamela for Skype.  Now, you really need software to be 100% reliable.  You really do, so if you have an alternative to Pamela, I would grab it.  Right now, I don’t have time to figure out an alternative, so thank goodness; thank goodness Stephan was recording the episode on his end.  So whatever gremlin was trying to screw with me, we got the last laugh here because Stephan was doing the recording. 00:01:52 So in this episode, his audio will be better than mine because he’s recording himself basically locally and then me through Skype, so his audio will be better than mine.  That’s the reason.  And then at the end,

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. See also Kinsella, “Common Misconceptions about Plagiarism and Patents: A Call for an Independent Inventor Defense,” Mises Economics Blog (Nov. 21, 2009); and Kinsella, "If you oppose IP you support plagiarism; copying others is fraud or contract breach," in "Hello! You’ve Been Referred Here Because You’re Wrong About Intellectual Property" C4SIF. See also this Grok conversation summarizing "why the case for patent and for copyright has nothing to do with plagiarism, contract breach, and fraud, why all these things are distinct, and opposing patent and copyright does not imply favoring fraud, dishonesty, plagiarism, or contract breach." 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) See also Gregory N. Mandel, Anne A. Fast & Kristina R. Olson, "Intellectual Property Law’s Plagiarism Fallacy," BYU L. Rev. 2015, no. 4 (2015): 915–83; Gregory N. Mandel, "How people understand intellectual property, creativity and reward," in Abbe E.L. Brown & Charlotte Waelde, eds., Research Handbook on Intellectual Property and Creative Industries (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2018), p. 295 et pass.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 208. See also KOL387 | The Great IP Debate of 1983: McElroy vs. Schulman. [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, see Classical 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 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 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 211. My interview on the Wake Up Call podcast, Episode 44: Corporations and the Corporate Form. From the shownotes page: Episode Summary Stephan 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 Hessen Related 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 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 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 Slavery Walter Block episode:

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 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 Property Podcast: Play in new window | Download How 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 Property Guest’s Links: stephankinsella.com Libertarian Papers Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom AuthorMat KentPosted onSeptember 9, 2016

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 216. 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, along with the transcript. 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 company Links: 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 Levine If 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. Transcript (auto-generated by youtube): 0:02 [Music] 0:17 this is Isaac Morehouse welcome to the podcast where we discuss education 0:22 entrepreneurship big ideas how to put them into practice in the real world and above all how to live free how to go 0:33 from zero to a startup job in nine months you don't need to jump through 0:39 hoops or blast out resumes you can start today praxis combines a 3-month professional 0:46 bootcamp with a six month paid apprenticeship at a startup that leads directly to a 0:52 full-time job startups aren't just for coders sales marketing operations even if you're not 1:00 sure what you're interested in praxis places you with a dynamic growing company where you do work you love 1:06 become part of a team and make a difference praxis is tailored to your goals and your interests coaching 1:13 sessions group discussions with your peers skills training and a portfolio of projects along with the imprensa ship 1:20 create a powerful combination of real world experience and intensive learning 1:26 we are relentlessly committed to helping you discover and do what makes you come 1:33 alive we don't just prepare you for a job we actually give you one no degree 1:39 is required to get started on your career whether you're an ambitious go-getter right out of high school a 1:45

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. GROK SHOWNOTES: In this episode of the Kinsella on Liberty podcast (KOL217), recorded in 2016, libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella delivers a lecture at the Property and Freedom Society’s 2016 annual meeting in Bodrum, Turkey, titled “Intellectual Property is the Bastard Child of the Gatekeepers.” He argues that intellectual property (IP) laws, particularly patents and copyrights, are illegitimate state-enforced monopolies rooted in censorship and privilege, not property rights (0:00-10:00). Kinsella traces IP’s origins to historical gatekeepers—church, state, and guilds—who controlled knowledge dissemination, citing examples like the Stationers’ Company in England and the 1710 Statute of Anne, which transitioned censorship into modern copyright law (10:01-25:00). He uses Austrian economics to frame IP as a violation of natural property rights, restricting how individuals can use their own resources, such as a patented mousetrap, and argues that IP stifles innovation and competition (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s lecture positions IP as a tool of control, not a market-driven necessity. Kinsella further critiques the economic and cultural harms of IP, noting that patents drive up costs in industries like pharmaceuticals and copyrights limit artistic creativity, contrasting these with IP-free markets like open-source software that thrive on emulation (40:01-55:00). He debunks common pro-IP arguments, such as the utilitarian claim that IP incentivizes innovation or the labor-based notion that creators deserve monopolies, emphasizing that ideas are non-scarce and cannot be owned (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on alternatives like trade secrets, the feasibility of IP abolition, and IP’s global enforcement, reinforcing his call for a free market of ideas unburdened by state intervention (1:10:01-1:25:00). He concludes by urging libertarians to reject IP as a “bastard child” of gatekeeping, advocating for intellectual freedom to foster prosperity and innovation (1:25:01-1:25:40). This lecture is a provocative and thorough libertarian critique, ideal for those questioning IP’s legitimacy. Transcript and Grok Detailed Summary below GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s KOL217 podcast, recorded at the Property and Freedom Society’s 2016 meeting in Bodrum, Turkey, is a lecture titled “Intellectual Property is the Bastard Child of the Gatekeepers.” As a libertarian patent attorney, Kinsella argues that IP laws—patents and copyrights—are state-enforced monopolies rooted in historical censorship, not legitimate property rights. The 85-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, uses Austrian economics to critique IP’s philosophical, economic, and cultural harms, advocating for its abolition to enable a free market of ideas. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for approximately 5-15 minute blocks, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and IP’s Illegitimacy (0:00-10:00): Kinsella introduces the lecture, framing IP as a state-enforced monopoly born from gatekeeping, not property rights. Historical Origins of IP (10:01-25:00): Traces IP to church, state, and guild control, citing the Stationers’ Company and Statute of Anne as censorship tools. IP’s Conflict with Property Rights (25:01-40:00): Argues IP violates natural property rights,

  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 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’t   Stephan Kinsella Kinsella Law Group, Libertarian Papers, C4SIF.org   Houston Property Rights Association · April 28, 2017   Ï   When 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 possible Another way to put this: we live in a world of scarce resources Better called “rivalrous”   Let’s turn to the ideas of another great Austrian thinker, Ludwig von Mises Praxeology: 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 ends Notice 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 society   In society there is another way to handle the problem of scarce resources Instead 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 property When 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 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 Pledge EFF: 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 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. Update: See also Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society. 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 Update: see Repealing the Laws of Physics, with this amusing, possibly apocryphal, anecdote: "Mr. Cole explained that to do this you would need a trunk FULL of batteries and a LNG tank at big as a car to make that happen and that there were problems related to the laws of physics that prevented them from... The Obama person interrupted and said (and I am quoting here) "These laws of physics? Who's rules are those, we need to change that. (Some of the others wrote down the law name so they could look it up) We have the congress and the administration. We can repeal that law, amend it, or use an executive order to get rid of that problem. That's why we are here, to fix these sort of issues"."

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 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 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 225. This is my speech delivered earlier today at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society, Sept. 17, 2017. Video embedded below. Slides used embedded below (or can be downloaded). Transcript below. 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: Kinsella, A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability, Journal of Libertarian Studies 17, no. 2 (Spring 2003): 11-37 (to be included in Law in a Libertarian World) 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 One 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)   Transcript Reflections on the Theory of Contract by Stephan Kinsella From the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Property and Freedom Society, Bodrum, Turkey (Sept. 17, 2017) 00:00:11 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Thank you very much, Hans.  Thanks again, once again, to you and Gulcin for the invitation.  I’m honored and happy to be here.  I do believe this is my seventh or eighth time.  I figure that if I keep attending every year that, over time, my percentage rate of attendance will asymptotically approach 100%, sort of like the Bitcoin inflation rate. 00:00:36 Anyway, my topic today is reflections on the theory of contract.  I do have these slides.  I will post them later on my site when I post this talk.  And I have some background material here in the beginning and sprinkled throughout the lecture.  I was going to make a joke that Hans tends to assign me boring-sounding titles.  And I was going through some of the previous ones I’ve done here, which is on property rights and the protection of international investments, patent and copyright, corporations, legislation, and common libertarian misconceptions.  But they actually sound pretty juicy to me.  I guess I’m just a legal geek or something. 00:01:17 But anyway, when you say we’re going to talk about contract, it sounds like it’s a mundane, boring topic, but I believe this is the key, a proper understanding of contract theory is key to having a solid understanding of what libertarian principles are all about.  Libertarians usually view the libertarian theory or principle as the non-aggression principle, or the NAP.  And they’ll usually say something like the initiation of violence against others or aggression is impermissible, and they say so we’re against aggression. 00:01:55 And then they’ll just sort of throw in these other things that are sort of attached to it like ornaments to a Christmas tree.  They’ll say, and you can’t trespass, and you can’t make a threat, and you can’t breach contract, and of course, you can’t commit fraud, as if these are all implicitly part of what it means to commit aggression, and I’ll go over this later.  I think this is—we have to really understand the non-aggression principle is a shorthand for what the libertarian principles are. 00:02:23 But really, aggression is the violence against someone’s body, and all these other things are related to our property theory.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 226. See also PFP186. 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 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 ago Libertarian 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, 22:07 https://youtu.be/wgJOeWU1Bek *** “Argumentation Ethics, Estoppel, and Libertarian Rights” Presentation (Moscow. Nov. 2, 2014) https://stephankinsella.com/2014/1... *** Mises Wire: The relation between the non-aggression principle and property rights: a response to Division by Zer0 https://mises.org/blog/relation-betwe... *** Patterson in Pursuit Podcast: " https://youtu.be/M22mq4vA4Ew

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 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. Transcript below. Some of Ernie's shownotes are pasted 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, 2017 Hour 1:  Media Type: Audio   •  Time: 48:48 Mins and Secs Hour 2:  Media Type: Audio   •  Time: 136:0 Mins and Secs Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock - Radio Host: Ernest Hancock Email: ernesthancock@cox.net Website: www.ernesthancock.com Declare 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 1PCnPViv1PENR5Qme63DKYbj19hmHQoag1 Click 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 Archives DYI App for Android LRN.FM for Android and iOS! Listen Live @ LRN.fm HOUR ONE Media Type: Audio   •  Time: 48:48 Mins and Secs Guests:  Roy Robin Topics:  ICO Token FundHour 1 - Roy Robin (Founder ICO Token Fund) talks about their decentralized investment platform  Hour 2 - Stephan Kinsella (Intellectual Property Attorney) and Alan Korwin (Author; GunLaws.Com) discuss intellectual property and copyright issues Hour 3 - Stephan Kinsella on intellectual property rights CALL 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, 2017 Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock on LRN.FM / Monday - Friday 9 a.m. - Noon (EST) Studio Line: 602-264-2800    Hour 1 2017-11-03 Hour 1 Roy Robin from Ernest Hancock on Vimeo. Roy Robin With 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 Breakdown Below is the ICOT Foundations Strategy One Year Hold 40% 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 Hold ICO Investing 25% of the Funds will be used for ICO investing. Market Opportunities The ICOT Foundation will invest 12.5% of the fund into to profit from market opportunities such as Corrections, Hard Forks, etc. Acqusitions The ICOT Foundation will keep 22.5% of the fund available for ICO Acquisitions & Mergers. CHECK OUT THE ICOT TOKEN SALE Round One $ 50,000 5 Million Coin Hard Cap Any Unsold Tokens BURNED SOLD OUT Round Two $ 1.8 Mil 2.5 Mil Tokens at 0.25 2.5 Mil Tokens at 0.50 Any Unsold Tokens BURNED This Round is Live Round Three 5 Mil 2.5 Mil Tokens at 0.75 1.25 Mil Tokens at $1 1.25 Mil Tokens at $1.50 Upcoming Round Join The Token Sale! Below Are The Steps To Buy ICOT: Send Eth From ERC20 Wallet :  Token Address: 0xEF333188332869D25C67CA7505a2eE9CD6B591dB Gas: 200,000 Add Custom Token Information : Token Address: 0x63e7eEd4c0B1EaA2c8b21195e5255aB227fe3D2a Token: ICOT Decimals: 18 ======================================= TOPICS DISCUSSED... http://www.

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 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. Transcript below. Youtube: https://youtu.be/B4k9Wv7obWA Original Youtube: TRANSCRIPT Let’s Talk Ethereum—Libertarianism, Anarcho-Capitalism & Blockchains Stephan Kinsella and Christian Seberino Let's Talk ETC! (Ethereum Classic) podcast, Dec. 8, 2017   00:00:05 CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: Hello and welcome to another edition of Let’s Talk ETC.  I’m your host, Christian Seberino.  And today I have a special guest with me, Stephen Kinzella.  Did I pronounce your name correctly? 00:00:20 STEPHAN KINSELLA: No, Stephen Kinsella, but that’s close enough. 00:00:24 CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: Okay, Stephen Kinsella.  And so I think you'll agree he's a will be an interesting guest for us.  He is – let me read part of his Wikipedia page.  So Stephan Kinsella is an American intellectual property lawyer, author and deontological anarcho-capitalist.  He attended Louisiana State University where he earned a Bachelor of Science and Master of Science in electrical engineering.  So he does have knowledge definitely of technical aspects and a Juris Doctor from the Paul M. Hebert Law Center, and he also obtained an LL.M. at the University of London. 00:01:11 He was formerly an adjunct scholar of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, faculty member of the Mises Academy, and he also co-founded the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom, C4SIF, of which he is currently the director.  So wow.  Welcome, and congrats on that very impressive resume. 00:01:37 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Thank you very much. 00:01:39 CHRISTIAN SEBERINO: So the reason I thought it would be interesting to have you on the show, and I think the audience would agree – so a lot of people get into blockchain technology and Ethereum Classic, which is one of the main focuses of the show, because they have libertarian leanings.  That's not a requirement, but I do notice it attracts a lot of those people.  And they were all – or most of us are technically minded, and so a lot of times people will say things and I'll wonder, well, is what you're saying really backed up by the people that know about the law and economy more than developers? 00:02:26 Would they agree with the things people are saying?  And so that's why I think you're a very helpful guest because you bring that that side of things.  We don't usually discuss things with lawyers and people that know so much about the economy.  So why don't we – why don’t you start with – why don't you describe from your website what a deontological libertarian is?  Now, when I searched for that on Wikipedia, it came up that it was the same thing as a natural-rights libertarian.  So can you kind of talk about that? 00:03:05 STEPHAN KINSELLA: Sure.  Well, keep in mind that I didn't write that page, so that's someone else's description.  I don't strongly disagree with it, but I think what the person writing that was trying to get at was there are – there’s considered to be two basic types.  Now there are some people that think there are three or more but two basic types of approaches towards, say, ethics.  And to simplify it, they’re empirical/utilitarian and natural rights/deontological. 00:03:40 So the first would be kind of a consequentialist approach, which is basically, we're in favor of rules in society and laws that lead to the greatest benefit for society in general.  And that's sometimes called utilitarianism.  It's an empirical approach that a lot of economi...

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 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 235. This is a short video produced by the Federalist Society (Feb. 6, 2018), 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. see also James Stern: Is Intellectual Property Actually Property? [Federalist Society No. 86 LECTURE] Transcript below. 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 Property I 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.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 236. [Update: a transcript is now available.] At Libertopia 2012, I delivered a 45-minute talk , "Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP" (Oct. 12, 2012), 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. Grok summary: In this lecture delivered at Libertopia 2012, libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella systematically dismantles common arguments for intellectual property (IP), particularly patents and copyrights, asserting they are incompatible with libertarian principles and free-market dynamics (0:00-5:00). Kinsella begins by outlining the libertarian property rights framework, rooted in Austrian economics, which assigns ownership to scarce, rivalrous resources to avoid conflict, contrasting this with ideas, which are non-scarce and should be freely shared (5:01-15:00). He critiques fallacious pro-IP arguments—such as the utilitarian claim that IP incentivizes innovation, the natural rights argument tying ownership to creation, and the notion that IP is a contract—using examples like a cake recipe to show that knowledge guides action without needing ownership (15:01-25:00). Kinsella argues that IP creates artificial scarcity, stifles competition, and redistributes property rights, harming innovation and liberty. Kinsella further debunks specific pro-IP arguments, such as the idea that creators deserve rewards for their labor or that IP protects against theft, clarifying that copying ideas is not stealing but a natural part of learning and competition (25:01-35:00). He addresses the historical roots of IP in state-granted monopolies, like the Statute of Monopolies (1623), and its practical flaws, including high litigation costs and barriers to innovation, citing industries like open-source software that thrive without IP (35:01-45:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella responds to audience questions on alternatives like trade secrets, the impact of IP on pharmaceuticals, and libertarian strategies to oppose IP, reinforcing his call for abolition to foster a free market of ideas (45:01-54:30). He concludes by urging libertarians to reject IP as a statist intervention, advocating for intellectual freedom to drive prosperity (54:31-54:42). This lecture is a concise, hard-hitting critique of IP’s intellectual and practical failures. Detailed Grok Summary below 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. Grok detailed summary Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s Libertopia 2012 lecture, “Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP,” critiques the philosophical and practical justifications for intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents and copyrights violate libertarian property rights and hinder innovation. Drawing on Austrian economics, Kinsella debunks pro-IP arguments, from utilitarian incentives to natural rights claims, advocating for IP’s abolition to enable a free market of ideas. The 54-minute talk, followed by a Q&A, uses clear examples and libertarian principles to make a compelling case. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Libertarian Context (0:00-5:00): Kinsella introduces his anti-IP stance, framing the lecture as a libertarian critique of fallacious pro-IP arguments. Property Rights and Scarcity (5:01-15:00): Explains that property rights apply to scarce resources, not ideas, using Austrian economics to show IP’s incompatibility with liberty.

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). Grok shownotes summary: In this follow-up podcast, KOL237, recorded on October 18, 2012, Stephan Kinsella continues his Libertopia 2012 lecture, “Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP,” covering additional fallacious pro-IP arguments not addressed in Part 1 (KOL236) due to time constraints (0:00-10:00). As a libertarian patent attorney, Kinsella systematically debunks arguments like IP being justified by its inclusion in the U.S. Constitution, the claim that IP infringement is theft or piracy, and the notion that creators deserve rewards for their labor, arguing these misapply property rights to non-scarce ideas, creating artificial scarcity that stifles innovation (10:01-30:00). Using examples like J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter franchise, he illustrates how markets reward creators without IP, emphasizing that patents and copyrights are state-granted monopolies that violate natural property rights and hinder competition. Kinsella further critiques arguments that IP is a contract or protects against unfair competition, clarifying that IP imposes real rights against the world, not consensual obligations, and that copying is legitimate market behavior, not theft (30:01-50:00). He addresses the “tragedy of the commons” analogy for ideas, refuting claims that ideas need protection to prevent overuse, and discusses practical harms like patent trolling and high litigation costs, citing industries like open-source software that thrive without IP (50:01-1:10:00). In the final segment, Kinsella tackles objections like the need for IP to fund expensive R&D, arguing market incentives suffice, and concludes by urging libertarians to reject IP as a statist intervention that impoverishes society (1:10:01-2:09:39). This comprehensive lecture, spanning over two hours, is a rigorous libertarian critique of IP’s philosophical and economic flaws.   Youtube, Slides, and Transcript below, plus a Grok Detailed Summary. This podcast is Part 2, covering most of the remaining 41 issues, some of which are noted below. GROK DETAILED SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s KOL237 podcast, recorded on October 18, 2012, is Part 2 of his Libertopia 2012 lecture, “Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP,” completing the critique begun in KOL236. As a libertarian patent attorney, Kinsella debunks additional pro-IP arguments, arguing that patents and copyrights violate property rights by imposing artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas, harming innovation and liberty. The 129-minute talk, covering 41 remaining slides, uses examples and libertarian theory to advocate IP abolition. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Context (0:00-10:00): Kinsella explains the podcast as a continuation of his Libertopia 2012 lecture, covering remaining pro-IP arguments. Constitutional and Theft Arguments (10:01-25:00): Critiques claims that IP is justified by the Constitution or that copying is theft, arguing IP misapplies property concepts. Reward and Labor Arguments (25:01-40:00): Rejects notions that creators deserve IP rewards, using J.K. Rowling to show markets reward without IP. Contract and Fairness Arguments (40:01-55:00): Debunks the idea that IP is a contract or protects fairness,

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 238. At Libertopia Oct. 12, 2012, I participated in an hour-long IP panel with Charles Johnson, moderated by Butler Shaffer. GROK SHOWNOTES: In this hour-long panel discussion at Libertopia 2012, recorded on October 12, 2012, Stephan Kinsella and Charles Johnson, moderated by Butler Shaffer, debate the legitimacy of intellectual property (IP) from a libertarian perspective, focusing on patents and copyrights (0:00-10:00). Kinsella, a patent attorney and staunch IP opponent, argues that IP violates property rights by imposing artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas, using examples like a patented mousetrap to illustrate how patents restrict owners’ use of their resources (10:01-25:00). Johnson complements this by emphasizing IP’s role in state-enforced monopolies, particularly in pharmaceuticals, where patents inflate prices and limit access, and critiques attempts to replicate IP through contracts as unfeasible due to independent discovery (25:01-40:00). The panel underscores IP’s conflict with free-market principles, advocating for its abolition to foster innovation and liberty. Shaffer’s moderation keeps the discussion lively and rules-free, prompting both panelists to address audience questions on topics like the practical impacts of IP on innovation and whether contractual alternatives could replace patents and copyrights (40:01-55:00). Kinsella refutes the utilitarian argument that IP incentivizes creativity, citing open-source software as evidence of innovation without IP, while Johnson highlights the cultural distortions caused by copyrights, such as limiting artistic remixing (55:01-1:00:00). The panel concludes with a call to reject IP as a statist intervention, emphasizing that a free market thrives on emulation and competition, not monopolistic restrictions (1:00:01-1:00:24). This engaging discussion offers a robust libertarian critique of IP, blending theoretical insights with real-world examples, and is a must-listen for those questioning the legitimacy of patents and copyrights. Transcript and Grok Detailed Summary below. For my other presentation, and for more details, see KOL236 | Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP (Libertopia 2012). Youtube: https://youtu.be/lTWjqn16fGk Grok Detailed Summary Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview The Libertopia 2012 IP panel, recorded on October 12, 2012, features Stephan Kinsella and Charles Johnson, moderated by Butler Shaffer, discussing the libertarian case against intellectual property (IP). Kinsella, a patent attorney, and Johnson, a philosopher, argue that patents and copyrights violate property rights, create artificial scarcity, and hinder innovation. The 60-minute, rules-free panel critiques IP’s theoretical, historical, and practical flaws, advocating for its abolition to enable a free market of ideas. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block, based on the transcript at the provided link. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Panel Setup (0:00-10:00): Shaffer introduces Kinsella and Johnson, establishing a casual, rules-free format to debate IP’s legitimacy. Kinsella’s Anti-IP Argument (10:01-25:00): Kinsella argues IP violates property rights by restricting resource use, using scarcity and action theory. Johnson’s Critique of IP Monopolies (25:01-40:00): Johnson highlights IP’s state-enforced monopolies, particularly in pharmaceuticals, and critiques contractual alternatives. Audience Questions and Practical Impacts (40:01-55:00): Panelists address IP’s innovation costs and contractual feasibility, emphasizing market alternatives. Cultural and Market Arguments (55:01-1:00:00): Johnson and Kinsella discuss IP’s cultural distortions and evidence of innovation without IP.

Debating Wright Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 234. This is a debate on IP between me and a noted Bitcoin expert, Craig Wright, hosted and moderated by the Vin Armani show. Transcript below. After the debate I 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 in the ensuing weeks, things between us devolved on Twitter. Wright had promised 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. Youtube (with captions): https://youtu.be/5ckcdnD9lFw Original Youtube (which contains a large number of comments; see below):  ❧ TRANSCRIPT Intellectual Property Debate: Stephan Kinsella vs. Craig Wright Stephan Kinsella, Craig Wright, and Vin Armani Vin Armani Show, London and Las Vegas, Jan. 27, 2018 00:00:00 VIN ARMANI: Welcome everyone to today’s debate.  We are debating intellectual property.  The two opponents are Stephan Kinsella and Craig Wright.  Stephan Kinsella is an attorney in Houston, director of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom and editor of Libertarian Papers.  He is one of the foremost libertarian experts on intellectual property. 00:00:23 And Dr. Craig Wright is an inventor, computer scientist, and businessman who is one of the earliest minds behind Bitcoin.  He’s the chief scientist at nChain research and development company involved in Bitcoin and blockchain technologies.  So today what we are going to be debating is the following resolution resolved.  Intellectual property law is a legitimate and useful institution that belongs in the emerging global sphere of blockchain technology and cryptocurrency. 00:00:54 Craig Wright will be arguing for the resolution, and Stephan Kinsella will be arguing against.  This debate is going to consist of a series of five-minute statements and rebuttals, a series of rounds.  The first round is going to be an opening statement from each of the debaters.  We are going to start with – did we say we’re starting with Craig Wright?  So we will start with Craig Wright who is arguing for the resolution.  Dr. Wright, if you will. 00:01:26 CRAIG WRIGHT: Thank you. So basically what we’re looking at is the idea that intellectual property has no value from other people. Now, I would argue it does, not because of the common constraints and whatever else people put about scarcity and what they think about copying but for a number of reasons first as the scarcity of good ideas.  There are many ideas out there in the world,

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 240. https://youtu.be/hXw9BWKXChk From Episode 23 of Cameron Talks Science. Episode 23: Patents and Paywalls: How IP Stifles Scientific Innovation: Stephan Kinsella February 11, 2018 Cameron English The 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 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. Youtube: https://youtu.be/bV4UFJQtxu4 Transcript below, as well as a Grok summary: Below is a summary of the discussion from the Part of the Problem podcast episode featuring Dave Smith and Stephan Kinsella, as aired on the provided YouTube link. The summary is organized into 10–15 bullet points with approximate time markers, based on the transcript provided. 0:00–1:15: Dave Smith opens the episode with a sponsor ad for stamps.com, highlighting its convenience for mailing services, available 24/7, and offering a four-week trial, postage, and a digital scale for new users who sign up with the promo code "problem." He encourages listeners to support the sponsor to help keep the show running. 1:21–1:43: The podcast intro emphasizes themes of freedom, questioning how the U.S. can claim to be the freest country while incarcerating more people than any other nation, reflecting on the growth of government from America’s founding to the present day. 1:55–3:37: Dave announces upcoming events, including a sold-out comedy show and podcast in Los Angeles, a meet-up with Jason Stapleton and others on March 31, and a debate at the Soho Forum on April 16 about fractional reserve banking featuring Bob Murphy and George Selgin. He also promotes the Contra Cruise (October 21–28), describing it as a libertarian vacation. 3:37–4:34: Dave introduces guest Stephan Kinsella, a libertarian writer and patent attorney, praising his insights into libertarian philosophy. Kinsella briefly describes his work, mentioning his legal practice in Texas and an upcoming book compiling essays on rights theory, intellectual property, and contract theory. 4:58–7:36: Kinsella shares his journey to libertarianism, sparked by reading Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead in high school, which led him to philosophy and economics, then to Murray Rothbard’s works. He transitioned from a Randian minarchist to an anarchist, influenced by Rand, Milton Friedman, and later Ron Paul, though his libertarian roots predate Paul’s prominence. 7:45–11:28: The discussion shifts to contemporary politics, with Dave expressing disappointment in Rand Paul for not fully carrying forward Ron Paul’s legacy, though acknowledging he’s still a strong senator. Kinsella notes he avoids political activism, finding Trump’s presidency entertaining and preferable to a Hillary Clinton administration, despite policy flaws like tariffs and neoconservative appointments. 11:45–16:28: Kinsella expresses skepticism about achieving an anarcho-capitalist society through political or intellectual activism, citing historical failures and societal resistance to libertarian ideas. He’s cautiously optimistic, believing technological advancements and wealth could naturally erode state power, making freedom a default rather than a persuaded ideal, referencing the fall of communism in 1990 as a cultural shift toward markets. 16:34–20:41: Dave and Kinsella discuss the irony of modern socialism’s appeal, noting that even leftists now reference Nordic models rather than pure socialism, a tacit victory for markets. Kinsella laments the ignorance of socialism’s historical failures among youth,

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. Youtube: https://youtu.be/bRsaVKXzYKk 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 243. From my recent appearance on the Libertarian Christians podcast, discussing (what else) IP, with host Norman Horn from May 22, 2018. See also KOL388 | Cantus Firmus with Cody Cook: Against Intellectual Property, and “Libertarians and the Catholic Church on Intellectual Property Laws” (2012) and links therein. Youtube: https://youtu.be/mrcZJsnSMUw  

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). (Recorded May 26, 2018) Grok's shownotes: Two-Paragraph Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers 0:02 - 35:16: In this engaging episode of "Your Welcome" with Michael Malice, guest Stephan Kinsella, a prominent libertarian and patent attorney, dives into the contentious topic of intellectual property (IP) abolition. Kinsella argues that IP laws, including patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets, create artificial scarcity and hinder innovation by restricting the free use of ideas, which are non-scarce resources (2:01 - 3:25). Using examples like Malice’s own book-writing experience, Kinsella challenges the notion that IP incentivizes creativity, suggesting that market competition and alternative models like crowdfunding could sustain creators without legal monopolies (3:32 - 8:46). He critiques the historical roots of IP, such as the Statute of Monopolies (9:40), and highlights empirical studies showing IP’s negligible or negative impact on innovation, particularly in pharmaceuticals (15:19 - 20:23). The discussion also touches on cultural distortions caused by IP, exemplified by convoluted comic book copyright battles like Captain Marvel’s (29:10 - 31:45). 35:16 - 1:05:20: The conversation shifts to practical implications and personal anecdotes. Kinsella envisions a publishing model driven by platforms like Kickstarter, reducing reliance on traditional publishing houses (37:25 - 39:19). He addresses real-world cases, such as Martin Shkreli’s drug price hike, to illustrate how government interventions, not market failures, exacerbate IP-related issues (42:12 - 44:53). The episode takes a humorous turn with a discussion of libertarian memes, particularly the “helicopter ride” meme tied to Hans-Hermann Hoppe, sparking online controversy (45:09 - 49:07). Finally, Kinsella shares a deeply personal story about his prostate cancer diagnosis and innovative laser treatment, offering insights into navigating health challenges and the role of patents in medical technology (50:00 - 1:04:07). The episode concludes with a reflection on the intersection of IP and medical innovation, underscoring Kinsella’s broader critique of government-granted monopolies (1:04:13 - 1:05:06). Grok summary and Youtube transcript below Update: for more on the Helicopter incident, see KOL462 | CouchStreams After Hours on Break the Cycle with Joshua Smith (2021): Hoppe's Michael Malice Helicopter Photo, Scooter Rides with Sammeroff, Mises Caucus Hopes, the Loser Brigade https://youtu.be/i0rvfJpPJ-4?si=UIrr3Yr_9MSy7cBL 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 Original video available by subscription at GasDigital

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 245 From 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. Recorded June 6, 2018. Youtube: https://youtu.be/7FBu0EXyukU

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: 35iDYDYqRdN2x6KGcpdV2W1Hy3AjGje9oL Matthew 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-funds Further 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 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 248. TEMP: http://traffic.libsyn.com/livera/SLP15_-_Stephan_Kinsella.mp3 From my recent appearance on Stephan Livera's bitcoin-focused podcast. SLP15 – Intellectual Property, Bitcoin, and Internet Censorship, with Stephan Kinsella Stephan 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 platforms Stephan Kinsella links: Twitter: @nskinsella Stephan’s website: StephanKinsella.com Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom Stephan Kinsella’s podcast, Kinsella on Liberty Podcast links: Libsyn SLP15 Apple Stitcher Spotify I 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 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 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. Also podcast at PFP195. Update: see also International Law, Libertarian Principles, and the Russia-Ukraine War, Free Life (19 April 2022) Related material: see material linked in the above slides, including: Kinsella, On the UN, the Birchers, and International Law International Law, Libertarian Principles, and the Russia-Ukraine War Rubins, Papanastasiou & Kinsella’s International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution: A Practitioner’s Guide, Second Edition (Oxford, 2020) 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) See also Neocons Hate International Law The UN, International Law, and Nuclear Weapons Nukes and International Law Update: See my International Law, Libertarian Principles, and the Russia-Ukraine War; see also Murray Rothbard, "Just War," in John Denson, ed., The Costs of War: Much of "classical international law" theory, developed by the Catholic Scholastics, notably the 16th-century Spanish Scholastics such as Vitoria and Suarez, and then the Dutch Protestant Scholastic Grotius and by 18th- and 19th-century jurists, was an explanation of the criteria for a just war. For war, as a grave act of killing, needs to be justified. ... Classical international law ... should be brought back as quickly as possible.

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 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: https://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 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. The youtube version (audio here) and the line-mic'd version both truncate about 30 seconds too early. My own iphone version (which is used for this podcast) includes those extra comments, and this is included in the transcript as well, below. Grok shownotes: In this 2018 lecture hosted by the Berkeley Federalist Society, libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella presents a compelling case against intellectual property (IP) rights, specifically patents and copyrights, arguing they contradict libertarian principles and free-market dynamics (0:00-4:59). Kinsella begins by outlining the libertarian framework of property rights, rooted in the Austrian School’s emphasis on scarcity, explaining that only physical, rivalrous resources warrant ownership, while ideas, being non-scarce, should remain free to use (5:00-14:59). He critiques the utilitarian justification for IP, asserting that patents and copyrights create artificial monopolies, stifle competition, and redistribute property rights from original owners to state-favored entities, using examples like baking a cake to illustrate how knowledge guides action without needing ownership (15:00-24:59). Kinsella’s argument centers on the free market’s reliance on emulation and learning, which IP laws hinder by imposing artificial scarcity on information. Kinsella further dismantles IP by examining its historical origins in state-granted monopolies, such as the Statute of Monopolies (1623) and Statute of Anne (1710), which were rooted in privilege and censorship rather than market principles (25:00-34:59). He highlights practical flaws, such as patents encouraging litigation and inhibiting innovation, and refutes the “creation argument” that creators inherently own their ideas, using a marble statue example to show creation transforms owned resources, not ideas (35:00-44:59). In the Q&A, Kinsella addresses audience questions on trade secrets, open-source models, and IP’s impact on innovation, reinforcing that a free market without IP would foster greater creativity and prosperity (45:00-1:01:11). He concludes by urging libertarians to reject IP as a statist intervention, advocating for a world where knowledge flows freely to drive progress (1:01:12-1:01:36). This lecture is a thorough and accessible critique of IP from a libertarian perspective. Transcript below as well as Grok Summary. My speaking notes pasted below as well. Youtube: https://youtu.be/EWM39RyMNaM   GROK SUMMARY Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s 2018 Berkeley Federalist Society lecture articulates the libertarian case against intellectual property (IP), arguing that patents and copyrights violate property rights and free-market principles by imposing artificial scarcity on non-scarce ideas. Drawing on Austrian economics and libertarian theory, Kinsella critiques IP’s theoretical, historical, and practical flaws, advocating for its abolition to foster innovation and competition. The 61-minute lecture, followed by a Q&A, uses examples and analogies to make the case accessible. Below is a summary with bullet points for key themes and detailed descriptions for each 5-15 minute block. Key Themes with Time Markers Introduction and Libertarian Framework (0:00-4:59): Kinsella introduces himself as a libertarian patent attorney and outlines the lecture’s focus on IP’s incompatibility with libertarianism. Property Rights and Scarcity (5:00-14:59): Explains that property rights apply to scarce, physical resources, not ideas,

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. Transcript below. 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/ https://youtu.be/YyQS0x7AOOM?si=YLNB6F6KAcvDJosi   Transcript   0:00 the Tom would show episode 1304 prepared a set fire to the index card of 0:06 allowable opinion your daily dose of Liberty education starts here the Tom 0:11 woods show hail you homeschooling parents out there you may be thinking to 0:17 yourselves well it's too far into the school year for me to change homeschooling programs now so we'll just 0:24 have to slog through it if that's how you feel go ahead and Chuck that labor-intensive 0:29 homeschool program you've got and join the self-taught Ron Paul curriculum through my link where you get a hundred 0:36 sixty dollars worth of free bonuses check it out at Ron Paul homeschool calm 0:41 everybody Tom was here with Stephan Kinsella you know Stephan as the author Who is Stephan Kinsella 0:47 of against intellectual property which is an extremely challenging book it's 0:53 the kind of book whose thesis you almost don't want to accept when you first start reading it and then by the end of 0:58 it you want to take that book and bash people over the head who don't accept it so it's very very well done interesting 1:04 he's also the author of the forthcoming as in early 2009 international 1:09 investment political risk and dispute resolution a practitioners guide published by Oxford and you can find him 1:16 I pretty sure at Stephan Kinsella comm am i right Stefan that's all correct 1:22 okay all right well I'm gonna blame you for this episode if it turns out badly and maybe take the credit if it turns 1:29 out well but it was Stefan's idea the other day we were on facebook Messenger it's but we have decent we'll go like a 1:36 week no conversation to three weeks and then it'll be this incredible flurry of back and forth messages on all kinds of 1:43 things we're having one of those the other day and you have a son who you tell me is in the I know you have a son 1:48 of course but I didn't know what grade he was in the tenth grade and so it's in fact I have a daughter who's in the tenth grade and so you think about 1:55 college and I know we got people who say you shouldn't go to college I get that but it's it's you know it's for some 2:02 people it's the wise thing to do and you got to do it on a case-by-case basis but you're in that mode you're thinking once 2:08 again just as you were when you were kid about college and college application 2:13 in the process and so you thought it would be interesting to talk to me about my own experience and I insisted this 2:18 would not be interesting in any way and then you persuaded me more or less that 2:24 there may be people who would find this interesting and so I mean look if I've 2:29 done episodes on my stupid musical tastes then probably we can do an episode on this so I thought in this 2:35 episode I might kind of in a way turn the hosts mic over to you in a way yeah 2:40 to let you kind of guide the conversation and ask me things that you think I might be able t...

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 publishing Previous 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 publishing Previous 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 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 publishing Previous 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 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. Transcript below. https://youtu.be/9OWKh3yTyJ8 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 TRANSCRIPT Liberty Forum Debate vs. Daniel Garza: Immigration Reform: Open Borders or Build the Wall? by Stephan Kinsella, Daniel Garza, and Jeremy Kaufman New Hampshire Liberty Forum, Manchester, NH (Feb. 7, 2019) 00:00:01 M: … something that we’ll find out through the course of this.  Speaking tonight are, on my left-hand side, depicted by the convenient net placard I have in front of me, is Stephan Kinsella.  You’re not talking to me, all right.  Stephan Kinsella who is a patent attorney and leading libertarian legal theorist, the founder and director of the Center of the Study of Innovative Freedom and the Libertarian Papers.  He’s a former adjunct professor at the South Texas College of Law.  He’s published numerous articles and books in IP law, international law, and the application of libertarian principles to legal topics.  You can give a hand for him if you want. 00:00:46 [clapping] 00:00:52 On my right, your left, Daniel Garza, president of the LIBRE Initiative.  I have a very lot to say about him, but he’s asked me not to say all of it.  So I will say that he held a couple of important positions for the Bush administration in the early 2000s, has also done important things for the Hispanic community for Televisa and Univision and is currently, as I already said, president of the LIBRE Initiative, lives in Mission, Texas with his wife and three children.  Daniel Garza. 00:01:22 [clapping] 00:01:27 Moderating this will be Jeffrey Kaufman.  I don’t have a bio written for him.  I’m going to let you listen to him talk about himself and then field your questions.  There is – for anyone who wants to participate in this, Jeffrey will give you the opportunity to do so.  There’s a microphone at the back there, so that the panelists can hear you.  Just find me back there, and I will let you speak, and thank you for coming.  Thank you everybody.  Off to you, Jeff. 00:01:52 [clapping] 00:01:57 JEFFREY KAUFMAN: Thank you.  And I actually, since I see my purpose as moderator to be facilitating discussion and this has very little to do with me, I’m going to tell you nothing about myself, so we’ll just let that mystery remain.  So my purpose is to facilitate these guys talking.  This will – if I’m doing my job right, this will be the longest I talk in sequence for the entire night.  I do my job to be making sure that they’re answering the questions that are asked.  I am going to be trying to find areas of disagreement, so if there’s too much consensus, I’ll hopefully try to rile them up a little bit, and my job is to ask hard questions.  There will also be, depending on how good my questions go, either some or a substantial amount of Q&A time from the audience. 00:02:37 So if you – as you’re listening to this, if you have questions, make a mental note of them, and there will be time to ask them at the end.  That said, this – while this is a debate, it is not going to be a debate with a fixed resolution, so it’s going to be somewhat of a discussion aspect, although we will be seeking to find the areas of disagreement between our t...

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 259. New Hampshire Liberty Forum, Manchester NH, Feb. 8, 2019. [Update: transcript here.] 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. Youtube: https://youtu.be/asozCLV4FJ4 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: I also appeared 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. It is here: KOL259-2 | Destination Unknown with Vin Armani and Dave Butler: Government vs. the State, Intellectual Property (New Hampshire Liberty Forum 2019).

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. https://youtu.be/RZi2xDWcSGo 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 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. [I believe this was the show where I derisively referred to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as "Occasional Cortex," as I did also here, to the uncomfortable chuckles of the others, and they excised this from the published episode.] 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,

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 your own peril!

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 NOTES Came 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 on Eventually led to Guido and I editing a Festschrift in 2009 Presented 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 ideas A more in depth talk on this last month at New Hampshire Liberty Forum, “How to Think About Property Rights”, on my podcast feed Laid 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 Crusoe Gives rise to the “natural” position on property (what Mises would call “sociological” ownership) In society,

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 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, 2017 And:

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? https://youtu.be/_c2NxObY-O0 NOTES: Stephan on Twitter Stephan’s website History of Patents Paris Convention Patent cooperation treaty Current (2019) US /China Tarriff dispute KOL234 | Vin Armani Show: Live from London: Kinsella vs. Craig Wright on Intellectual Property KOL267 | Sal the Agorist Interview: Bitcoin, Copyright, Craig Wright 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 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 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. [Update: KOL278 | Bob Murphy Show: Debating Hans Hoppe’s “Argumentation Ethics”.] 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. GROK shownote summary: In this episode of the Bob Murphy Show (Episode 39), recorded in June 2019, libertarian patent attorney Stephan Kinsella discusses "Law Without the State, and the Illegitimacy of IP (Intellectual Property)" with host Bob Murphy, delivering a thorough critique of intellectual property laws rooted in Austrian economics and libertarian principles (0:00-10:00). Kinsella begins by outlining the basis of libertarian law, emphasizing that property rights apply only to scarce, rivalrous resources like physical objects, not non-scarce ideas, and argues that a stateless society could achieve justice through private law mechanisms like contracts and arbitration (10:01-25:00). He then transitions to IP, asserting that patents and copyrights are state-granted monopolies that violate property rights by restricting how individuals use their own resources, using examples like a patented mousetrap to illustrate this infringement (25:01-40:00). Kinsella’s discussion, praised for its clarity and systematic approach, leverages Murphy’s probing questions to highlight IP’s philosophical and practical flaws. Kinsella further explores IP’s economic harms, such as distorted research and high litigation costs, citing studies that show no net innovation benefits, and contrasts these with IP-free industries like open-source software that thrive on competition (40:01-55:00). He addresses common pro-IP arguments, including utilitarian claims and creation-based ownership, arguing that creation transforms owned resources, not ideas, and dismisses contractual IP schemes as ineffective against third parties (55:01-1:10:00). In the Q&A, Kinsella responds to Murphy’s questions on transitioning to a stateless legal system, the role of reputation in private law, and IP’s impact on pharmaceuticals, reinforcing his call for IP’s abolition to foster a free market of ideas (1:10:01-1:33:05). The conversation, intended to include argumentation ethics but focused solely on IP due to time, concludes with Kinsella urging libertarians to reject IP as a statist distortion, aligning with his broader vision of decentralized justice (1:33:06-1:33:05). This episode is a compelling exploration of libertarian law and IP’s illegitimacy, ideal for those seeking a principled critique. Youtube Transcript and Detailed Grok summary below. https://youtu.be/G5MIdkXeufY GROK DETAILED SUMMARY: Bullet-Point Summary for Show Notes with Time Markers and Block Summaries Overview Stephan Kinsella’s KOL268 podcast, recorded on June 9, 2019, for Episode 39 of the Bob Murphy Show, is a discussion titled “Law Without the State, and the Illegitimacy of IP (Intellectual Property).” As a libertarian patent attorney, Kinsella argues that IP laws—patents and copyrights—are state-enforced monopolies that violate property rights, while a stateless society could achieve justice through private law. Rooted in Austrian economics, the 93-minute conversation, guided by host Bob Murphy’s insightful questions, critiques IP’s philosophical, economic,