Friday, January 30, 2009

Jeffrey Tucker, Again

A couple of you have emailed me to point out that Jeffrey Tucker is out with another attack on the rights of individuals and corporations to do as they please with what they produce. (Except, of course for Mises Institute books, specifically Mises: The Last Knight of Liberalism, where Tucker refuses to even discuss why I shouldn't be granted the right to publish the book under his anti-copyright view of the world.)

I didn't miss his piece. The errors in his thinking continue to pile up. In fact, there are so many that only a book will do justice to covering all of them.

I have been thinking about the relationship between the nature of property, property rights and government and have been planning to write a book on the subject, a few years down the road. However, Tucker's aggressive promotion of totalitarian anti-copyright and anti-patent thinking is a subset of property, property rights and government that needs to be addressed now.

Thus, I have decided to put aside a number of other projects to specifically address , in book form, the Kinsella-Tucker fallacies.

I believe the proper libertarian understanding of property rights solves the problem of "intellectual property" protection for, say, even the tough situations, such as, rights for those that first discovered how to start a fire or were the first to use the wheel. And the solution is not open source marketing. I'll cover all this and more.

The book is, for the most part, already "in my head" so it shouldn't take long to put it to paper, just a little bit of additional research. When it is in print, you will be the first to know.

4 comments:

  1. Why write a book when you don't even bother to read one that deals directly with your confusions?

    ReplyDelete
  2. You will have to buy the book and read it, to find out why. It won't be open source.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Blagojevich is my homeboy!!!January 31, 2009 at 12:54 PM

    What is clear is that Tucker needs to stop dancing around the request and state specifically why Wenzel cannot publish Last Knight. After all, it is a reasonable request, considering that Tucker does not believe in copyrights. Tucker, please fill in the blank:

    "Even though I do not believe in copyrights, Wenzel cannot publish Last Knight because [_______]."

    ReplyDelete
  4. Robert, it looks like the folks at Mises have "open sourced" the entirety of Mises.org's contents. Does this change your feelings on the issue, at least with regards to potential hypocrisy on the part of the institute?

    http://blog.mises.org/archives/009475.asp

    Do you plan on following through with your promise to publish an edition of Last Knight?

    ReplyDelete