Abolish Copyrights and Patents? A Soho Forum Debate

Patent lawyer Stephan Kinsella debates Law Professor Richard Epstein
------------------

----------------
The United States Constitution explicitly calls for copyright and patent laws to "promote the progress of science and useful arts" by "authors and inventors." But would getting rid of all intellectual property laws actually encourage more creativity and innovation by inventors, writers, and artists?

That was the topic of a November 15 Soho Forum debate held in New York City.

Stephan Kinsella, who's spent 28 years as a practicing patent law attorney, argued in favor of the proposition that "all patent and copyright law should be abolished."

He believes that government-created intellectual property laws empower patent and copyright trolls and powerful corporate interests while limiting the free flow of information, thus reducing the rate of innovation and creativity.

Richard Epstein, the Laurence A. Tisch professor of law at New York University School of Law, says that our current system isn't perfect but sees copyright and patents as a natural extension of private property rights and believes that it should be defended by libertarians accordingly. 

The debate took place in front of a live audience and was moderated by Soho Forum director Gene Epstein.

Narrated by Nick Gillespie, edited by John Osterhoudt, produced by Caveat, photos by Brett Raney.

[shadfurman]

In Seattle there was a coffee shop called Starlucks, it was older than Starbucks, Starluck was the guy's last name (provision for conflicting names if it's your name), and Starbucks sued him out of existence.

[tiavor]

another example of bad patent use:
in India they mix several patented cancer medications and have way better results. but when India entered some economic contract with the EU they banned all those mixes.

[niemand]

1st dude... there's no evidence to support what we've been doing out of momentum and possible villainy.

2nd dude... I reject your demand for evidence. Have some speculation and assertion instead.

[dburgessnotburger]

This was a very enlightening debate. I have actually changed my position on this topic. I use to be in support of IP and CR, but now I can see that IP is just a tool of monopolists to limit competition and stifle innovation. The drive to incentivize seems to flourish when it is left to free-market forces; not when it is impeded upon by legislative restrictions (statutes and patent licenses). Basically, systems that eliminate competition suffer due to the limitations of the instituted patent. Non-contractual exclusivity results in poor efficiency because the chance to improve such inefficiencies becomes illegal. I would posit that a patent-free world would alter the way idea creators profit and it would increase the development-rate of such a society.

[UltimatePerfection]

Copying is not theft.
Stealing a thing leaves one less left
Copying it makes one thing more;
That's what copying's for.

Copying is not theft.
If I copy yours you have it too
One for me and one for you
That's what copies can do

If I steal your bicycle
You have to take the bus,
But if I just copy it
There's one for each of us!

Making more of a thing,
That is what we call "copying"
Sharing ideas with everyone
That's why copying is FUN!

[theily]

Hey, this debate was MY idea, not yours! I’m suing!

[daltonbrasier]

I love that he used pharmaceuticals as an example of how patent laws work great.

[CarrotCakeMake]

Epstein's claim that patents protect small companies from large companies is hilarious.

[odigity]

Intellectual Property is like Social Justice - if you have to put a modifier before Property or Justice, it's not Property or Justice.

[tamygdala]

as a musician, yes. i always make my music royalty free so people can sample it how they please

[sleepn_on_me]

Collective learning is good evidence as to why patents and copyrights should be abolished
The invention of a tv was not all at once
It was a cumulation of many inventions

[zacboyles]

The success of open source software exposes the stifling nature of IP/CR.

[evelynn]

If it's impossible for the ordinary citizen to enforce, the it needs to be rethought. Too bad this is the opposite of the current system. Most systems start out with the best of intentions though. One reason why regulatory capture is a thing.

[TheSyriosBrothers]

Fascinating discussion. It's hard to get your mind around abolishing intellectual property rights but in large part that's probably because we just grew up with it as a "fact of life" sort of thing

[bgiv]

"I can't farm if you're going to farm."
There it is. The fundamental assumption that cooperation between strangers is impossible. Yes. You can both farm. This world is big enough for all of us.

[jonidimo]

I'm from Argentina, studying in the National University of La Plata. We are working on an "open and free" patent system, not to replace nor Abolish the current copyrights and Patents. We need and we WANT the possibility to choose if we want to patent in the "classical way" or in "an open way", we want to create a community, like GNU/Linux, Creative Commons licence for patents, Wikipedia, Blender, and more.

[samluke]

Wow! Stephen Kinsella destroyed Epstein's Eristic style of argumentation with numerous examples of evidentiary importance. This debate was one-way traffic from start to finish.

[abramgaller]

The need to recoup development costs is largely a red herring .Computers are making development costs progressively cheaper.

[homewall]

Note that the little guy gets no real benefit from patents because you are forced to find the person who is infringing it (and you can only guess at it as you'll likely have no clear proof), then hire lawyers to prosecute the patent against them, costing millions and having no clear outcome.

[patricklachance]

Intellectual property is not real property. The patent and copyright laws get in the way.