Weak Defense of IP

I’ve seen a lot of weak and pathetic arguments for IP, but this one takes the cake. (With reference to David Koepsell: Another Austrian-Influenced IP Opponent, Comment on Koepsell’s “A methodical response to Chris Holman’s ‘review’”, Are Libertarians For Intellectual Property?: Comment on David Koepsell’s “Why I Believe Gene Patenting is Wrong”.) See the comment by one David Mayes to Are Libertarians for Intellectual Property? (I believe he is responding to my comment: “I’m also affiliated with the Mises Institute, so I suppose Mr. Mayes has my work in mind when he unfairly, uncharitably, and falsely disparages and dismisses us as ‘idealogues.'”):

Stephan, I am not familiar with you or your work at all.

I believe we have different psychological perspectives on approaching patenting DNA. I feel connected to the history that has led to the current biotechnology infrastructure. Also, I feel connected to the type of libertarianism advocated by CEI and Cato embracing limited government which is practiced ubiquitously in the US at the municipal, state and federal levels. Since no government entity in the US, that I am aware of anyway, practices the von Mises ideal of political economy, ther must be a disconnect with what is going on and possibly some feeling of alienation.

I do not think that Tom Palmer is an idealogue. Upon reading about his background, I discovered he has affiliations with the Institute for Humane Studies. This would explain his conservative and moral objections to patenting DNA. Obviously, Cato respects his individuality on this issue which contrasts their official position and that is what their brand of libertarianism is all about. In contrast, I would imagine that a Mises scholar would have to quote Rothbard, Mises , or Hayek to give an official position which is my interpretation of an ideologue.

Main Entry: ideo·logue
Variant(s): also idea·logue
Function: noun
Etymology: French idéologue, back-formation from idéologie
Date: 1815
1 : an impractical idealist : theorist
2 : an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology

A number of psycholigists refer to the ability to form a sense of self as the final stage of cognitive develoment. Unfortunately, not everyone reaches this stage. I have the highest respect for IHS since Leornard Liggio taught me classical liberalism and I consider him my favorite teacher of all. No one has influenced my politics as much as he has.

Here is an article titled “The FTC’s Suit Against Intel Is an Attempt to Steal Intellectual Property” by: Robert S. Getman on Ayn Rand’s official website regarding monopoly caused by IP. Rand actually feels there is a moral obligation to protect our intellectal capital.

http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5275

But, actually my quote is referring to David Koepsell’s confusion with how libertarians justify a temporary monopoly. My discussions with other pragmatic liberatian scholars informed me of the heirarchy of core values.

Ain’t that somethin’?

My reply:

Dear Mr. Mayes, Strain as I might, I am confess that unable to discern even a hint of coherent argument in your no doubt higher level take on things. No doubt this is my own limitation due to being a “von Mises ideologue.” As best I can tell, you feel “connected” to something or another, and that settles it for you. How nice for you. Us lowly “von Mises ideologues” can only strive in vain to reach such lofty heights.