On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Aaeru <[email protected]> wrote: > It is an extremely serious case because they are attacking property > rights. > Anyone who is attacking property rights is a thief. It doesn't matter what > pretext you use to coat your action. Property rights is absolute morality. >
Indeed one can argue for absolute physical property rights from a libertarian perspective, but the reality is not as if they're currently absolute. Just consider legislation on psychoactives. But I agree that this case clearly shows how "IP" conflicts with real property rights; just as is outlined e.g. in S. Kinsellas "Against Intellectual Property" [ http://mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_1.pdf ] BTW: Here's the link to the relevant SCOTUS blog entry http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/kirtsaeng-v-john-wiley-sons-inc/ -pat
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss
