Against Monopoly

defending the right to innovate

Blocking Technology

Monopoly corrupts. Absolute monopoly corrupts absolutely.

Copyright Notice: We don't think much of copyright, so you can do what you want with the content on this blog. Of course we are hungry for publicity, so we would be pleased if you avoided plagiarism and gave us credit for what we have written. We encourage you not to impose copyright restrictions on your "derivative" works, but we won't try to stop you. For the legally or statist minded, you can consider yourself subject to a Creative Commons Attribution License.

current posts | more recent posts



There's a big difference between a noncompete and government mandated IP laws. In the former the parties both agree to enter into the relationship in exchange for a mutually beneficial situation (employer gets worker, worker gets pay).

The laws can be enforced against your will. That's a significant difference.

It is possible to waive Intellectual Privileges. It is still possible to agree not to have IP restrictions if it is mutually beneficial. It is also possible, if anti-trust laws don't prevent it, to agree not to compete when buying art.

For me the fact that it is possible to contract in and out of Intellectual Privilege restrictions is very confusing. If Intellectual Privilege hampers innovation, it should be mutually beneficial to contract out of the system.

We already see this happening in some cases, notably copyleft contracts like the GPL. Again I wonder why the practice is not more widespread. Has it not yet been discovered by the rest? Left to itself, would the free market have contracted into IP in some cases?

Freedom to contract does not solve the problem of monopoly. Monopoly is reinforced when you and I write a collusive contract agreeing to charge a higher price to a third person who isn't a party to the contract. Noncompete agreements and other private contracts work the same way as government "mandated" intellectual property: they are noncompetitive agreements. Here the third party is the prospective future employer.
In this case, we don't both make a profit. I am taken advantage as much as anybody else. In a sense, I am, by choosing to buy from the monopoly instead of choosing a free alternative, voluntarily trading away my liberties in return for the art it makes.

I wonder, if people (I am not alone) so readily trade these liberties away, how are we EVER going to stop intellectual monopoly? Is the only "solution" to ban voluntary agreement?

Also, in what ways are our current Intellectual Privilege laws worse than buying subject to contract? Do we gain a lot by moving to contracts from Intellectual Privilege?

You and I write a contract agreeing to split the monopoly profit derived by charging colluding to charge a high price to people who aren't party to the contract. There is nothing to say you can't pay me extra if I agree to sign a no-compete agreement: and if you want me to sign it, then that's exactly what you have to do.
If the publisher were forced to put the art on the market without monopoly protection, then society would win. We'd have low prices and low costs of innovating. So, what we need is not monopoly protection but precisely the opposite, making monopoly illegal. Right?

The problem, then, is not so much the idea of Intellectual Privilege regulation but market failure in the form of monopoly, that we want government to correct.

current posts | more recent posts

Submit Comment

Blog Post


Email (optional):

Your Humanity:

Prove you are human by retyping the anti-spam code.
For example if the code is unodosthreefour,
type 1234 in the textbox below.

Anti-spam Code



Most Recent Comments

Questions and Challenges For Defenders of the Current Copyright Regime It is one of the finest websites I have stumbled upon. It is not only well developed, but has good

Killing people with patents I'm not really commenting the post, but rather asking if this blog is going to make a comeback

The right to rub smooth using a hardened steel tool with ridges Finally got around to looking at the comments, sorry for delay... Replying to Stephan: I'm sorry

Let's See: Pallas, Pan, Patents, Persephone, Perses, Poseidon, Prometheus... Seems like a kinda bizarre proposal to me. We just need to abolish the patent system, not replace

The right to rub smooth using a hardened steel tool with ridges I'm a bit confused by this--even if "hired to invent" went away, that would just change the default

Do we need a law? @ Alexander Baker: So basically, if I copy parts of 'Titus Andronicus' to a webpage without

Do we need a law? The issue is whether the crime is punished not who punishes it. If somebody robs our house we do

Do we need a law? 1. Plagiarism most certainly is illegal, it is called "copyright infringement". One very famous

Yet another proof of the inutility of copyright. The 9/11 Commission report cost $15,000,000 to produce, not counting the salaries of the authors.

WKRP In Cincinnati - Requiem For A Masterpiece P.S. The link to Amazon's WKRP product page:

WKRP In Cincinnati - Requiem For A Masterpiece Hopefully some very good news. Shout! Factory is releasing the entire series of WKRP in Cincinnati,

What's copywritable? Go fish in court. @ Anonymous: You misunderstood my intent. I was actually trying to point out a huge but basic

Rights Violations Aren't the Only Bads I hear that nonsense from pro-IP people all the

Intellectual Property Fosters Corporate Concentration Yeah, I see the discouragement of working on a patented device all the time. Great examples

Music without copyright Hundreds of businessmen are looking for premium quality article distribution services that can be

Les patent trolls ne sont pas toujours des officines

Les patent trolls ne sont pas toujours des officines

Patent Lawyers Who Don't Toe the Line Should Be Punished! Moreover "the single most destructive force to innovation is patents". We'd like to unite with you

Bonfire of the Missalettes!

Does the decline in total factor productivity explain the drop in innovation? So, if our patent system was "broken," TFP of durable goods should have dropped. Conversely, since