StephanKinsella.com

Related:

• Kinsella’s Social Thought, Illustrated
• The Title-Transfer Contract Theory—Illustrated
• “Estoppel: A New Justification for Individual Rights” (1992)
• The Genesis of Estoppel: My Libertarian Rights Theory
• “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide”
• “A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights,” in Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston: Papinian Press, 2023), based on “Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 12, no. 1 (Spring 1996): 51–73

My estoppel theory of libertarian rights is illustrated graphically in the chart/poster below, prepared by Thiago @thiagovscoelho.

[continue reading…]

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 482.

Audio version of “A Tour Through Walter Block’s Oeuvre,” in Walter Block – Anarcho-Capitalist Austro-Libertarian, Elvira Nica & Gheorghe H. Popescu, eds. (Addleton Academic Publishers, 2025). Thanks to George Besada.

Made this audio version:https://t.co/dxc81hv00Z

— Jorge Besada (@hayekian) February 19, 2026

[continue reading…]

Podcast (kinsella-on-liberty): Play in new window | Download (39.4MB)

I recently added the text of this old chapter of mine to the post below on my legal blog. It was Appendix I to a book I co-authored with a colleague, but of course I wrote that appendix.

Economic Calculation Under Socialism, Appendix I to Protecting Foreign Investment Under International Law: Legal Aspects of Political Risk (1997)

By Stephan Kinsella, KinsellaLaw.com (Dec. 10, 2004):

Recently found this oldie but goodie: my “Economic Calculation Under Socialism,” Appendix I to Protecting Foreign Investment Under International Law: Legal Aspects of Political Risk (Dobbs Ferry, New York: Oceana Publications, 1997). Text below. It was not included in the successor treatise, Noah D. Rubins, Thomas N. Papanastasiou and N. Stephan Kinsella, International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution: A Practitioner’s Guide, 2d ed. (Oxford University Press, 2020), as my co-authors there were less libertarian than me… [continue reading…]

Related:

• The problem of particularistic ethics or, why everyone really has to admit the validity of the universalizability principle
• Kinsella, “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide,” Mises Daily (May 27, 2011)
• Kinsella, “Dialogical Arguments for Libertarian Rights” and “Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan,” both in Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston, Texas: Papinian Press, 2023)
• Hans-Hermann Hoppe, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism (Laissez Faire Books, 2013), ch. 7
• idem, The Economics and Ethics of Private Property (Auburn, Ala.: Mises Institute, 2006), chs. 11, 13

I came across an interesting reference in Alessandro Fusillo, “Rothbard, Philosopher of Law,” in Rothbard at 100: A Tribute and Assessment, Stephan Kinsella and Hans-Hermann Hoppe, eds. (forthcoming 2026):

According to Giovanni Birindelli, the universalization test is the only criterion to distinguish arbitrary rules from an objectively founded legal system. He argues that the only rule that passes the test is the non-aggression principle which justifies coercion (self-defense) as a means to uphold self-ownership. Giovanni Birindelli, “L’etica dell’uguaglianza davanti alla legge” (“The ethics of equality before the law“), Giovanni’s Substack (Nov. 5, 2023).

Google’s English translation is below. [continue reading…]

Related

• KOL234 | Vin Armani Show: Live from London: Kinsella vs. Craig Wright Debate on Intellectual Property
• KOL267 | Sal the Agorist Interview: Bitcoin, Copyright, Craig Wright
• IP is Not “Not Property”
• Libertarian and Lockean Creationism: Creation As a Source of Wealth, not Property Rights; Hayek’s “Fund of Experience”; the Distinction Between Scarce Means and Knowledge as Guides to Action
• KOL274 | Nobody Owns Bitcoin (PFS 2019)
• Joshua Fairfield, “Property as the law of virtual things,” Front Res Metr Anal. (2022 Aug 26)
• Fairfield, Tokenized: The law of non-fungible tokens and unique digital property, Ind. LJ 97, 1261 (2022)
  • Other articles by Fairfield
• “Dr” [sic] ¹ Craig S Wright, “Blockchain and Digital Assets: A New Paradigm for Copyright and Patent Distribution through Micropayments” (29 Nov 2023)
• Ana Mercedes López Rodríguez, “Law Applicable to Virtual Real Estate in the Metaverse Proceedings of the International Congress Towards a Responsible Development of the Metaverse,” June 2024

A new article is out from Craig “Satoshi” Wright, “You Don’t Own Your Digital Stuff. NFTs Could Actually Fix That — Without Intellectual Property.“, Craig’s Substack (Feb 10, 2026). Subtitled: “Why the “right-click save” crowd and the IP maximalists are both wrong, and how a 150-year-old economic tradition explains what digital ownership really means.”

I mentioned this in a tweet:
Craig Wright

Oh, I just noticed this is faketoshi, haha.

It doesn’t start out auspiciously: “There’s a dirty secret lurking behind every digital purchase you’ve ever made. That Kindle book you bought? You don’t own it. That film on your iTunes library? Not yours either.”

Well there are two…

— Stephan Kinsella (@NSKinsella) February 12, 2026

[continue reading…]

1. KOL234 | Vin Armani Show: Live from London: Kinsella vs. Craig Wright Debate on Intellectual Property: “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. … Wright claims over 16 master’s degrees (e.g., in statistics from the University of Newcastle, LLM from Northumbria University) and numerous certifications, but these have faced similar scrutiny. His LLM dissertation was found heavily plagiarized in the 2024 court case, with the judge calling it “extensive and methodical.” Court Context: In COPA v Wright [2024] EWHC 1198 (Ch), the judge ruled Wright lied “extensively and repeatedly” about being Satoshi Nakamoto, including forging documents. While degrees weren’t the focus, the judgment notes his “wholesale forgery, fabrication, and exaggeration” could extend to qualifications, but proceeded assuming they were real.” Grok re Wright PhDs (“In the 2024 UK High Court judgment in COPA v Wright (where Wright was ruled not to be Bitcoin’s creator Satoshi Nakamoto), the judge noted Wright’s pattern of forgery and plagiarism in other academic work (e.g., his 2008 LLM dissertation had 45 of 58 paragraphs copied verbatim), casting indirect doubt on his degrees. However, the court assumed his qualifications were true for the case, as they weren’t directly challenged.“); Wikipedia; Craig Wright, “The quantification of information systems risk: A look at quantitative responses to information security issues,” Doctoral Thesis, “Charles Sturt University” (2017); 2024 UK High Court judgment in COPA v Wright (pdf), ¶¶ 565–568, 582–585, on pattern of dishonesty,” ¶¶ 127–128, 393–395, 400, 926. [↩]

Related

• Barry Smith on Artificial Intelligence
• KOL467 | Discussing AI and IP with Juani from Argentina
• KOL461 | Haman Nature Hn 119: Atheism, Objectivism & Artificial Intelligence
• All-In Podcast Concerned But Confused about IP and AI Training
• Whereupon Grok admits it (and AI) is severely gimped by copyright law
• Libertarian and IP Answer Man: Artificial Intelligence and IP
• Copyright Thicket and President Trump’s AI Training Data Solution

I remember seeing a poster from a few years ago showing all the things smart phones replaced—pagers, dictaphones, address book, alarms, timers, music, podcasts, audiobooks, levels, cameras, dictionary, translation, maps, computers, compasses, GPS, flashlights, and so on. I asked Grok and ChatGPT to do the same for AI. See posters and lists below. Of course AI is being gimped and hampered by IP, and some of the things it will do are only necessary because of IP—for example generating new music or book covers or illustrations with AI because using existing music or images might infringe copyright.

See 24 things that the mobile phone has replaced; 30 Things Your Smartphone Has Replaced; 24 things made obsolete by smartphones.

[continue reading…]

Related:

• International Law Commission
• Summaries of the Work of the International Law Commission” General principles of law
• Seventy-sixth Session (2025)
• Analytical Guide to the Work of the International Law Commission
• Yearbooks of the International Law Commission
• ILC Annual Reports
• Chapter IV General principles of law (2023, pdf) ¹

• International law: Sources of international law (Wikipedia)
• Sources of international law: General principles of law (Wikipedia)

Interesting recent lecture by Prof Mads Andenæs and Prof Johann Ruben Leiss, University of Oslo, ‘The Systemic Function of General Principles’ – Prof Mads Andenas & Prof Johann Ruben Leiss, University of Oslo (Feb. 6, 2026). See their paper Article 38(1)(d) ICJ Statute and the Principle of Systemic Institutional Integration; also General Principles and the Coherence of International Law – Principes Généraux Et Cohérence Du Droit International; The Law and Politics of the General Principles of Law in the Twenty-First Century. [continue reading…]

1. “To cite but a few examples, in the Corfu Channel case, the International Court of Justice found that the use of indirect evidence, in addition to being admitted in “all systems of law”, was “recognized by international decisions”. 44 In Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, the Court similarly noted that “[i]t is a general principle of law, confirmed by the jurisprudence of this Court, that a party which advances a point of fact in support of its claims must establish that fact”. 45 In the Chagos Marine Protected Area arbitration, the tribunal noted that the “frequent invocation [of the principle of estoppel] in international proceedings has added definition to the scope of the principle”. 4… The European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights have likewise relied on prior decisions to justify the existence of the principle iura novit curia. 47 In international criminal law, prior decisions by international courts and tribunals have also played a significant role in the identification of general principles of law.48″ … “27 A general principle of law that is often referred to in practice and in the literature, and which may be considered to be of a general and abstract character, is the principle of good faith. …

   28 Examples of general principles of law that have been invoked or applied in practice, and which may be considered to be of a more specific character (because they present, for instance, precise conditions for their application), include the principles of res judicata and lis pendens, and the right to lawyer-client confidentiality. See, respectively, International Court of Justice, Question of the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between Nicaragua and Colombia beyond 200 Nautical Miles from the Nicaraguan Coast (Nicaragua v. Colombia), Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2016, p. 100, at pp. 125–126, paras. 58–61; Permanent Court of International Justice, Certain German Interests in Polish Upper Silesia, Judgment, 25 August 1925, P.C.I.J. Series A, No. 6, pp. 5 et seq., at p. 20; International Court of Justice, Questions relating to the Seizure and Detention of Certain Documents and Data (Timor‐Leste v. Australia), Provisional” .. “Examples of such general principles of law may include pacta sunt servanda, good faith, the principles of lex specialis and lex posterior, respect for human dignity and elementary considerations of humanity.” [↩]

Adapted from an forthcoming article by Hans-Hermann Hoppe:

… concerning [Javier] Milei and the (non-)closure of Argentina’s central bank” … He has also introduced some economic “free market” reforms in Argentina that have been inspired by “Austrians.” But he has done nothing truly radical, deserving the praise of any anarcho-capitalist. He has not closed the central bank, as originally promised, and there are no signs that this will happen any time soon. He has brought consumer price inflation down from 300% to some 30% (wow!), but the money supply (of all monetary aggregates) has continued to grow rapidly (even more so than under several of his predecessors). He has centralized rather than decentralized government power and is on record as being fundamentally opposed to secession. In addition to assuming (rather than repudiating, as Rothbard would have recommended; see below) the existing government debt owed to the IMF of some 40 billion USD, he burdened the Argentinian people with another 42 billion USD of debt, solicited from the IMF, the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, and in order to avoid insolvency right before the Argentinian mid-term election, in October 2025, he further required a rescue package of some 20 billion USD from “his dear friend” Donald Trump. [continue reading…]

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 481.

This is my appearance on Adam Haman’s podcast and Youtube channel, Haman Nature (Haman Nature substack), a special 200th Episode Livestream Celebration! It features regular hosts Adam Haman and Tyrone, and other previous guests (recorded Feb. 7, 2026; official episode: Replay of 200th Episode Livestream Celebration! | Hn 200). I and some other previous guests appeared. ¹

Shownotes and transcript below. [continue reading…]

Podcast (kinsella-on-liberty): Play in new window | Download (Duration: 2:48:29 — 154.3MB)

1. • KOL478 | Haman Nature Hn 185: The Universal Principles of Liberty
   • KOL469 | Haman Nature Hn 149: Tabarrok on Patents, Price Controls, and Drug Reimportation
   • KOL461 | Haman Nature Hn 119: Atheism, Objectivism & Artificial Intelligence
   • KOL456 | Haman Nature Hn 109: Philosophy, Rights, Libertarian and Legal Careers
   • KOL432 | Haman Nature 0027: School Choice “Debate”
   • KOL425 | Haman Nature Ep. 4: Stephan Kinsella dismantles “intellectual” property
   • KOL423 | Haman Nature Ep. 2: Getting Argumentative [↩]

Related:

• Stephan Kinsella, Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston, Texas: Papinian Press, 2023) [LFFS]
• A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability, in LFFS
• Inalienability and Punishment: A Reply to George Smith, in LFFS, esp. Part III.C
• The Title-Transfer Theory of Contract
• Sheldon Richman, “Slaves Contracts and the Inalienable Will,” Libertarian Forum, XI, no. 4 (July-Aug. 1978)

I recently put the Liberty archives online and was browsing through old issues, most of which I had read when I used to subscribe to the print edition. One that caught my eye was Sheldon Richman, “The Absurdity of Alienable Rights” (January, 1989, p. 50). This article was in response to Ethan O. Waters (the pseudonym for R.W. Bradford), ¹ “Reflections on the Apostasy of Robert Nozick” (September-October, 1987), p. 14). ² [continue reading…]

1. See Bradford, “At Liberty” (September, 1997), p.23 n.*; Sheldon Richman’s letter (January, 1989), p. 6 [↩]
2. Bradford revisits this gedankenexperiment in Bradford, “At Liberty” (September, 1997), p.23; see also n.4; and see also Michael R. Edelstein, “Existence Exists, Slavery Enslaves” (letter) (May, 1989), p.6; Andrew B. Lewis, “Ghost Dancing With “Inalienable” Rights” (May, 1989), p. 27. See also Richman’s previous article on this topic, Sheldon Richman, “Slaves Contracts and the Inalienable Will,” Libertarian Forum, XI, no. 4 (July-Aug. 1978). [↩]

Jakub Bożydar Wiśniewski, Libertarian Quandaries (2016). The author was a member of my journal Libertarian Papers‘ Editorial Board. Book description:

Libertarianism is the social philosophy that identifies individual liberty as the most fundamental social value and, by extension, treats voluntary cooperation as the only morally permissible form of social interaction. This succinct work addresses some common doubts about libertarian theory centered around the claim that it has to balance its excessive moral ambition with the requisite degree of „realism”, „practicality”, and “compromising”. To that extent, it addresses subjects ranging from the usefulness of ethical principles, to the feasibility of efficient interventionism, to the stability of libertarian anarchy. In other words, its aim is to suggest that the libertarian philosophy is not only theoretically rigorous and practically relevant, but also eminently feasible in strictly pragmatic terms.

It was reviewed in Aiden P. Gregg, “Book Review: Libertarian Quandaries,” Libertarian Papers 8, no. 2 (2016): 319–327.