It appears the first episode of the Ron Paul Channel is on YouTube.
[Link to pirated youtube video removed from text of email-RW]
At first I thought it was a free preview, and had planned to post it on my site, but upon
further inspection it appears this channel is not affiliated with Ron Paul and is not official.
The channel even links back to RonPaul.com, which we all know is not owned or run by Ron Paul.
I'm curious about your take on this as it relates to your IP stance. Is it up to Ron Paul and
Ron Paul Channel to figure out how to prevent something like this? It seems that if every episode can be slapped onto YouTube the next day by these days it could easily crush the business model.
Marc ClairFirst as a believer in intellectual property protection, and specifically in this case copyright protection, I would object to anyone copying from the Ron Paul Channel, without the direct permission of Ron Paul, or the entity that holds the rights to the RPC broadcast.
Editor In Chief
My thoughts on this are completely in line with Murray Rothbard who wrote in Man, Economy and State (Chapter 10: section 7)
On the free market[...]There would[...]be copyright for any inventor or creator who made use of it, and this copyright would be perpetual, not limited to a certain number of years.
Indeed as do I, Rothbard saw any infringement on copyright as theft:
. Let us consider copyright. A man writes a book or composes music. When he publishes the book or sheet of music, he imprints on the first page the word “copyright.” This indicates that any man who agrees to purchase this product also agrees as part of the exchange not to recopy or reproduce this work for sale. In other words, the author does not sell his property outright to the buyer; he sells it on condition that the buyer not reproduce it for sale. Since the buyer does not buy the property outright, but only on this condition, any infringement of the contract by him or a subsequent buyer is implicit theft and would be treated accordingly on the free market. The copyright is therefore a logical device of property right on the free market.Thus, unless permission has been specifically granted to post the video on youtube, there is a clear stream of libertarian scholarship holding that the posting is theft.
As for the remedies Ron Paul, or the RPC organization, have, they certainly can pursue the thieves in a court of law. Also as I understand it, if youtube is contacted they may pull a video if they consider it in violation of copyright. It will have to be up to Ron Paul or the RPC organization to determine if it is worth the effort to use either of these remedies.
It is held in parts of the anti-IP community that because it is difficult to enforce intellectual property rights law that IP law should be wiped off the books. This is simply central planning. It should be left to every victim of theft whether or not he wants to pursue damages, not some overseers who want to establish the limits for everyone on the ability to pursue damages. How is that libertarian?
As for the RPC business model, itself, obviously to the degree that daily broadcasts are pirated and published on youtube, RPC will lose revenue. It will have to be up to RP and the RPC organization to determine if it is worthwhile to continue production if revenues are not high enough because of pirating and if it is difficult to protect against piracy. It may be that the revenue loss is not that great and RP decides to continue the channel or RP may decide to change the model to make RPC, say, advertiser supported.
All these are decisions that will have to be made by RP and the RPC organization. That this decision making will have to be made also erases the the idea advanced by anti-IP advocates that there is no harm done by copying material, because the original creator of the material still has his original copy. We can see the weakness in that argument most clearly in this discussion about RPC. Great damage to RPC can be done by reproducing the broadcasts. It can create a great fall off in revenue, possibly to the point where the channel will have to be shutdown.