The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Copyright Law

rated by 0 users
This post has 7 Replies | 4 Followers

Top 500 Contributor
Posts 32
Points 905
Mr Jones Posted: Mon, Aug 25 2008 4:15 AM

This has probably been asked before -- or answered in an article somewhere -- so I don't mind a hyperlink as an answer to my question:

What is the theory regarding copyright law? I know that it is a very complicated branch of the law; but I would be interested to know what has been said about it -- especially in terms of Bastiat's law philosophy.

Thank you.

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 7,546
Points 131,365
MVP
SystemAdministrator

http://www.stephankinsella.com/ip/

 

hth

If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 862
Points 15,105

Another important point: in our title-transfer model, a person should be able to sell not only the full title of ownership to property, but also part of that property, retaining the rest for himself or others to whom he grants or sells that part of the title. Thus, as we have seen above, common-law copyright is justified as the author or publisher selling all rights to his property except the right to resell it... The only proviso is that there must, at every time, be some existing owner or owners of all the rights to any given property.

Rothbard's view on the subject from The Ethics of Liberty, ch 19.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 67
Points 1,310
solos replied on Mon, Aug 25 2008 9:46 PM

What rights are there in a free market? Other companies that are not bound by the contract could just use the same material without paying. I don't see how copyright is any beneficial to society.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,670
Points 26,595

Anonymous Coward:

Another important point: in our title-transfer model, a person should be able to sell not only the full title of ownership to property, but also part of that property, retaining the rest for himself or others to whom he grants or sells that part of the title. Thus, as we have seen above, common-law copyright is justified as the author or publisher selling all rights to his property except the right to resell it... The only proviso is that there must, at every time, be some existing owner or owners of all the rights to any given property.

Rothbard's view on the subject from The Ethics of Liberty, ch 19.

Thats a very weak justification. It does nothing to explain why selling a copy of a book is equivalent to reselling the original.

It presumes that the ideas on the page are a seperate piece of property from the physical book, yet thats the entire point of debate!

Peace
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,272
Points 22,975
scineram replied on Thu, Aug 28 2008 10:09 AM

Exactly. Not to mention he completely disregards uncontracted third parties.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 9
Points 275
TropicalK replied on Thu, Aug 28 2008 11:36 AM

I is conceivable that a mutually benefitial contractional agreement would include a prohibition of copying. With the music industry for example, I sell you a song I made as long as you agree not to disseminate it in any fashion. Both sides gain. Copyright in some respects is just the government enforcing a private contract.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,272
Points 22,975
scineram replied on Thu, Aug 28 2008 11:57 AM

And what if others hear or read it?

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (8 items) | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap