Comments (13)

• Curt Howland

  Unfortunately, the site uses Adobe Flash for everything.

  Which is fine, if Flash works. And maybe, if Adobe ever makes a real Linux version, maybe it will be more reliable for us "non-windows" people.

  Isn't it ironic that a book, "Against Intellectual Property", would not be viewable because it's being hosted in a closed, proprietary media format?

  I think that's "irony". Could be "absurdity", maybe "tragedy", English is only my first language so I haven't actually studied it.

  Published: October 24, 2008 1:37 PM

• Daniel Waite

  I *just* downloaded and started reading this last night. I am consistently surprised at the amount, quality and now, availability, of awesome content on this website. Thank you!

  Published: October 24, 2008 2:08 PM

• R. Jordan

  Maybe I don't fully understand Stephan Kinsella arguments against IP...

  If I create a product, can I create restrictions regarding the use of my product?

  Examples:

  If I was a recording artist, could I create a contract with my consumers stipulating the uses and restrictions of my CD?

  If I was a drug manufacturer, could I create a contract with my consumers stipulating the uses and restrictions of my drugs?
  

  Published: October 24, 2008 4:01 PM

• YerMawm

  Curt, I'm going to go with comedy. Sometimes all we can do is laugh.

  Published: October 24, 2008 4:49 PM

• anonymous

  I'm on linux (debian) and it works fine for me.

  Published: October 24, 2008 5:01 PM

• Philip

  This is indeed very cool. But is there a way to jump directly to a particular page (as opposed to flipping one page at a time)? Or for that matter, to link directly to one?

  Published: October 24, 2008 8:07 PM

• Ball

  R. Jordan,

  Well, first of all most patents are not products but merely ideas, but on the question of contractual restrictions you can't contract everything. There are such things as unreasonable and unenforceable contracts. Such things ought to be left to the courts, of course, but to lend a few examples:

  EULAs are unenforceable.
  
  You can't contract away inherent rights like the right to reverse engineer (DMCA can suck it) or use the product however you deem fit (without having the seller liable, of course).

  You can't sublet or lease your property then evict any guest just because you don't like their face.

  You can't sell your labor, only lease it, otherwise you would have slavery.

  You can't create clauses which are inherently unfair, like crazy penalties for situations beyond one's control.

  The manner in which information is used these days makes it expensive or near impossible to enforce copyrights. Heck, copyrights were always there to protect publishers, who are becoming obsolete. We already see the shift toward open access as shared information is far more valuable than otherwise. When I have to get an article from the library or publisher, I feel like going to the barber to have my blood let a bit then hopping into my horseless carriage.

  Even if you COULD restrict the use of ideas you came up with first...why? What purpose does that serve?

  Another point is how focus has been put on innovation when capital is more scarce (or else why am I typing this on a 5yr old laptop?) What good does it serve to create a non-property property? It won't come to my door any faster unless it accelerated production somehow, and yet it does the opposite.

  Published: October 24, 2008 8:11 PM

• Peter

  Again, please look into djvu format!

  Published: October 24, 2008 10:30 PM

• R. Jordan

  Ball,

  I don't want to restrict the use of any products, I was just curious about how the free market could protect ideas.

  Why couldn't I contract a prohibition on reverse engineering? Wouldn't this similar to non-compete clauses?

  Published: October 24, 2008 11:27 PM

• R. Jordan

  Ball,

  I don't want to restrict the use of any products, I was just curious about how the free market could protect ideas.

  Why couldn't I contract a prohibition on reverse engineering? Wouldn't this similar to non-compete clauses?

  Published: October 24, 2008 11:28 PM

• Marcello

  How are you going to enforce let alone prove that someone broke that contract, Jordan?

  Published: October 25, 2008 2:49 PM

• gooddebate

  R Jordan,

  I was trying to do the same thing at first; think of how to protect the person who came up with the idea first. You're right it sure looks like the originator is hanging out there with no protection.

  This is why I think that the most interesting argument against IP is the industries where IP doesn't apply. The reason I think they are interesting is because we've been taught that if you don't protect the creator of the idea then he won't have any incentive to create. But when you look at these IP less industries it doesn't work like we've been taught.

  Take apparel for instance. This is probably the most robust creative industry in existence. But the designers don't have copyright protection for their designs. If what we've been taught was correct then we'd see designers as the low person on the totem pole, slaves to the manufacturers. But that's not what happens, the designers are sought after and paid well.

  I like consistent arguments and so I was thinking of it this way; capitalism is a ladder. You grab the bottom rung and start climbing. If you only want to create one idea and stop then I guess you need protection. But if you're going to start climbing you will have many ideas. Others will then have ideas based on your ideas. If your ideas have value then the market will pay you. If your ideas don't have value then you don't get the money.

  But I agree with you that the hardest concept to give up is that an originator of an idea needs protection. What's really going on is that the originator of the idea is given a monopoly over it. Thinking of that way makes it easier to throw away.

  Published: October 25, 2008 3:29 PM

• R. Jordan

  Marcello and gooddebate,

  I don't think that ideas or products need protection. Personally, I would never try to protect any of my ideas or products, not in the current system or in a free society.

  I am just curious about the moral and ethical aspects of restrictions placed on products. I have ZERO intentions of ever trying to protect any of my ideas, thoughts, or creations, but I am curious about the moral and ethical aspects of others creating restrictions for their ideas and products.

  In a free society, what is going to stop a recording artist from creating a contract to go along with their CD? Sure, I would try not to support an artist that does something such as this, but in all reality, I believe they have the right and ability to do so.

  Published: October 25, 2008 4:58 PM