StephanKinsella.com

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: 2:14:41 — 70.7MB)

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.

Reinterpreting Libertarianism: New Directions in Libertarian Studies, Edited by Łukasz Dominiak, Igor Wysocki, Stanisław Wójtowicz, and Dawid Megger (2026, Routledge). I was just alerted to this book and have not read it yet, but it looks very interesting, from the excerpt and table of contents available here (pdf). It is focused on Polish libertarian scholarship and seems to be influenced by the Rothbardian-Austro-libertarian tradition (Dominiak and Wysocki, two of the volume’s editors, have been published previously in my journal Libertarian Papers, ¹ as has another Polish libertarian (and a member of the journal’s Editorial Board), Jakub Bozydar Wisniewski (not a contributor to this volume), ² and Dominiak and Slenzok, another contributor, have also published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies, revived in the wake of Libertarian Papers. It appears to discuss my work and that of Hans-Hermann Hoppe fairly extensively, if the index is any indication (see screenshot from the Kindle edition), which is a good sign.

Update: See also David Gordon’s review: Polishing Off Rothbard. Curiously, he omits my name from the list of scholars explicitly listed in the introduction. From the introduction:

Polish libertarian scholarship focuses predominantly on what can be called the Rothbardian branch of libertarianism. Rothbardianism is the most radical version of right-libertarianism (understood not as the political or cultural right but in terms of its approach to land ownership which according to this variety of libertarianism can be full and virtually unlimited), which finds its original expression in the works of Murray Rothbard, Walter Block, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, David Gordon, Stephan Kinsella, and many others (we purposefully concentrate on thinkers whose work centres on libertarianism rather than Austrian economics, although there are many great Austrian economists who also contribute to Rothbardianism).

In Gordon’s review, he truncates this list and hops over my name:

It is heartening to know that the brand of libertarianism they profess is Rothbardianism. As Łukasz Dominiak (who is the most senior academic among them and, it is fair to say, is their guiding spirit), Stanisław Wójtowicz, and Igor Wysocki tell us in the introduction, “Polish libertarian scholarship focuses on what can be called the most radical version of right-libertarianism, which finds its original expression in the works of Murray Rothbard, Walter Block, Hans-Hermann Hoppe . . . and many others. . .

No comment.

***

From the publisher:

This volume provides a thorough reconsideration of libertarian theory, offering novel perspectives that challenge established assumptions and initiate new directions for philosophical, legal and economic investigation. [continue reading…]

1. Lukasz Dominiak, “The Blockian Proviso and the Rationality of Property Rights,” Libertarian Papers 9 (1) (2017): 114–128. [↩]
2. “Rejoinder to Block’s Defense of Evictionism”; Wiśniewski, J. B. (2010). A critique of block on abortion and child abandonment. Libertarian Papers, 2(16); etc. See also Wiśniewski, Libertarian Quandaries. [↩]

Related:

• Using International Law to Protect Property Rights and International Investment
• International Law, Libertarian Principles, and the Russia-Ukraine War
• KOL250 | International Law Through a Libertarian Lens (PFS 2018)
• Review of Higgins, Problems and Process: International Law and How We Use It (1995)
• Hoppe: Marx was “Essentially Correct”

Fascinating recent lecture by Antonios Tzanakopoulos, Professor of Public International Law at the University of Oxford, ¹ for the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law at Cambridge University: “‘Marxist Insights for International Law’ – Prof Antonios Tzanakopoulos, University of Oxford.” (apple podcasts)

See also:

• Antonios Tzanakopoulos, “The Master’s Tools and the Master’s House: Marxist Insights for International Law,” The Oxford Handbook of International Law in Europe, Anne van Aaken, Pierre d’Argent, Lauri Mälksoo, Johann Justus Vasel, eds (Oxford University Press, 2024), pp. 351–375 (summarized below)
• The Right to Be Free from Economic Coercion
• Economic Warfare
• The International Court of Justice and the Concept of Aggression https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2587722
• other papers at his SSRN page.

Summary and transcript below. [continue reading…]

1. Coincidentally, one of my friends, Dan Sarooshi, is as well. [↩]

My elaborations of the Rothbard-Evers title-transfer theory of contract (in “The Title-Transfer Theory of Contract” and  “A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability,” chap. 9 of Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston: Papinian Press, 2023)) are illustrated graphically in A Libertarian Theory of Contract (pdf; images below), prepared by Conza with an AI assist (Google’s NotebookLM I believe).

Re the performance bond solution mentioned on p. 8, see:

• KOL463 | Contracts, Usury, Fractional-Reserve Banking with André Simoni
• The Title-Transfer Theory of Contract, Part IV.A
• LIBERTARIAN ANSWER MAN: Smart Contracts (re escrow)
• KOL338 | Human Action Podcast Ep. 308 with Jeff Deist: Rothbard on Punishment, Property, and Contract (re escrow)

[continue reading…]

A 1987 article in Liberty Magazine, John C. Green & James L. Guth, “The Sociology of Libertarians,” Liberty (September-October, 1987),  p. 5, inspired a poll in the July, 1988 issue, “The Liberty Poll: Who We Are and What We Think” (p. 37) which queried readers on various beliefs and six “moral problems.” That issue also included  comments by Liberty‘s editors, “The Meaning of the Liberty Poll” (p. 49), including a comment by Rothbard, “What’s Wrong with the Liberty Poll; or, How I Became a Libertarian,” Liberty (July, 1998), p. 52. 

This was followed up by a second poll in the February, 1999 issue, “The Liberty Poll” (p. 11), and ten years later in the June, 2008 issue with a third poll. See Mark Rand, “The Liberty Poll Results: Who We Are and What We Think,” Liberty (June, 2008), p. 29.

Ross Overbeek, “Moral Absolutes, Truth, and Liberty,” also writing in the June, 2008 issue, summarized the polls’ six ethical dilemmas: [continue reading…]

As mentioned at Liberty Magazine Archives, I have am now hosting all back print issues of Liberty online. Enjoy! (But only if you oppose copyright!)