At the Cato Institute, there was a forum last week on the topic of whether intellectual property is property in a hard or soft sense:
Conservatives and libertarians are sometimes divided on the question of whether intellectual property is really property, and how much protection it deserves. On one hand, intellectual property is a product of mixing labor with material in the public domain, and it’s freely alienable, able to be bought, sold, licensed, or used as the owner sees fit. On this view, intellectual property is a bedrock natural right, central to economic and personal freedom, which the United States Constitution empowers Congress to protect. The contrary position, taken by some libertarians, views intellectual property as a government-conferred right that encourages political rent-seeking, restricts liberty, and thwarts innovation. Please join us as our panel of experts debates who has the better of the argument.
Here’s a recording of the forum:
Via Intellectual Property and First Principles @ Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies and the Federalist Society for Law & Public Policy Studies.