Mine Aysen Doyran wrote:
> michael, i thought intellectual property rights were central to the
> principles of the free market.
Not really. People, such as Hayek, were against intellectual property rights,
since they granted a monopoly to the supposed owner. Although here is Ayn Rand
125: "Patents and copyrights are the legal implementation of the
base of all property rights: a man's right to the product of his
mind."
128: "Today, patents are the special target of the collectivists'
attacks -- directly and indirectly, through such issues as the
proposed abolition of trademarks, brand names, etc. While the so-
called "conservatives" look at those attacks indifferently or, at
times, approvingly, the collectivists seem to realize that patents
are the heart and core of property rights, and that once they are
destroyed, the destruction of all ocher rights will follow
automatically, as a brief postscript."
> Am i wrong? i don't see how they
> constitute a monopoly in the free market or violate the principles of the
> free market. well, capitalism is a monopoly regime of property owners to
> begin with.
according to the mythology of capitalism, they compete with each other.
> what is equally interesting is that monopoly seems to be
> intrinsic to capitalism, rather than accidental.
yes, but they pretend otherwise.
>
> there are capitalist regimes without intellectual property rights fully
> established or somewhat established, like those economies in the periphery
> or semi periphery of the world system (i.e.., Turkey). they are nonetheless
> still capitalist by virtue of their integration into the world capitalist
> system.
Germany and Switzerland did not have patentsin the 19th century.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
