KOL229 | Ernie Hancock Show: IP Debate with Alan Korwin

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 229. This is my appearance on the Ernie Hancock "Declare your Independence" show for Nov. 3, hours 2 and 3. There is a "debate"—more of a discussion really—with libertarian-ish gun-rights author Alan Korwin in the first segment. Grok summary shownotes: [0:00–59:24] In this episode of the Ernest Hancock Show (KOL229, Nov. 3, 2017), host Ernest Hancock facilitates a heated debate on intellectual property (IP), specifically copyright, featuring Stephan Kinsella and Alan Korwin. Kinsella, a libertarian legal theorist and outspoken critic of IP, argues that copyright is an unjust state-granted monopoly that stifles innovation and free speech, rooted in historical control mechanisms like the Stationers Company and the Statute of Anne (1709). He emphasizes that ideas are not scarce resources and thus cannot be owned, drawing on Austrian economics and the nonaggression principle to assert that copying is not theft but a natural part of human learning and competition. Hancock aligns with Kinsella, expressing frustration with government-enforced IP restrictions and advocating for a decentralized, piracy-friendly internet where ideas flow freely, citing examples like Napster and crowdsourced films like Iron Sky to illustrate alternative models. [59:25–2:15:31] Alan Korwin, an author and Second Amendment advocate, defends copyright as a natural property right, arguing that creative works like songs (e.g., Chuck Berry’s “Johnny B. Goode”) are scarce, valuable, and inherently owned by their creators. He equates unauthorized copying to fraud or theft, asserting that creators deserve royalties for their work’s use, as facilitated by private organizations like ASCAP. The debate grows contentious as Korwin accuses libertarians of advocating theft due to their opposition to IP, while Kinsella counters that copyright is a statist tool, not a natural right, and that creators can profit without monopolistic protections. Post-debate, Kinsella and Hancock discuss the broader implications of IP, the rise of pirate culture, and the futility of enforcing copyright in the digital age, with Hancock inviting Kinsella to contribute to the Pirates Without Borders’ Third Letter of Captain Marque on communication and IP. They also touch on libertarian politics, criticizing the Libertarian Party’s drift and praising the growing influence of Rothbardian ideas.   Grok detailed shownotes and Youtube Transcript below. GROK DETAILED SHOWNOTES: Detailed Summary for Show Notes with Time Segments Segment 1: Introduction and Setting the Stage (0:00–14:38) Description: Ernest Hancock opens the show with a passionate rant against intellectual property, particularly patents and copyrights, which he views as government-enforced restrictions on ideas. He introduces Stephan Kinsella, a libertarian IP critic, and Alan Korwin, an author who defends copyright. Hancock frames the debate as a clash between freedom-oriented libertarians and those who support state-backed IP protections, referencing the Pirate Party and his own Pirates Without Borders initiative. Kinsella briefly defines patents (for inventions) and copyrights (for creative works), noting their historical roots and the extension of copyright terms, particularly through the Sonny Bono Act. Summary: Hancock rails against IP as a control mechanism, citing examples like patented shoe colors and the Pirate Party’s push for online freedom (0:55–2:59). Introduces Kinsella and Korwin, noting Korwin’s Second Amendment books and his recent presentation influenced by Kinsella’s anti-IP work (3:32–4:40). Kinsella explains patents (17-year term) vs. copyrights (life plus 70 years), highlighting the Founders’ 14-year copyright term and Disney’s role in extensions (5:59–8:34). Discussion of IP in trade agreements as “IP imperialism,” with Hancock questioning enforcement in places like China (8:36–9:59). Hancock mentions crowdsourced films like Iron Sky as alternatives to IP-dependent models (12:00–13:29). Segment 2: Historical Context and Copyright’s Origins (14:39–29:12) Description: Kinsella traces copyright’s history to the printing press, when the Stationers Company in England held a state-backed monopoly on publishing, controlled by the Crown and church. The Statute of Anne (1709) shifted rights to authors but favored publishers, creating gatekeepers. Hancock and Kinsella critique this as state control, with Hancock dismissing government authority over ideas. Korwin joins, defending copyright as a natural property right, arguing that creators own their works (e.g., a book written in a room) as part of a “bundle of rights” alongside realty and personalty. He challenges Kinsella’s anti-IP stance, asserting that copying is theft. Summary: Kinsella details copyright’s roots in the Stationers Company and Statute of Anne, linking it to state monopolies (15:50–18:58). Hancock rejects government’s role in regulating ideas, citing constant changes in copyright law (14:38–15:12). Korwin argues copyright is a real, protectable property right, using an exercise where attendees created copyrighted books (29:12–30:49). Korwin claims IP is as valid as land or chattel, asserting that copying a song denies creators rightful profits (30:49–31:33). Segment 3: Debate Intensifies: Property Rights vs. Ideas (29:13–49:58) Description: The debate heats up as Korwin insists that songs like “Johnny B. Goode” are unique, scarce property owned by their creators, equating unauthorized use to fraud. Kinsella counters that copyright is a state-granted monopoly, not a natural right, and that copying isn’t theft since the original creator retains their work. He argues ideas are non-rivalrous, using Austrian economics to explain that information isn’t scarce like physical goods. Hancock supports Kinsella, rejecting the need for government permission to use ideas. Korwin grows frustrated, accusing libertarians of dodging questions and advocating theft, while Kinsella emphasizes the distinction between legal and moral rights. Summary: Korwin argues “Johnny B. Goode” is scarce and valuable, owned by Chuck Berry, and copying it is fraud (41:23–42:26). Kinsella denies songs are property, as they’re non-rivalrous information, not scarce resources (48:43–49:07). Hancock rejects government’s role, arguing ideas can’t be owned and enforcement is impractical (36:06–36:59). Korwin accuses libertarians of inconsistent principles, while Kinsella clarifies copyright’s legal status vs. its injustice (43:17–45:29). Segment 4: Korwin’s Defense and Departure (49:59–1:17:42) Description: Korwin doubles down, arguing that copyright is a natural right, more real than physical property because it’s a unique creation. He cites ASCAP and BMI as private mechanisms for collecting royalties, framing copying as theft that harms creators’ earnings. Kinsella challenges this, noting that copyright restricts free speech and that piracy undermines its enforcement. Hancock mocks the idea of penalties for playing songs, aligning with Kinsella’s view that technology renders copyright moot. Korwin leaves for another commitment, reiterating that libertarians’ anti-IP stance is dishonorable, while Kinsella and Hancock plan to continue the discussion. Summary: Korwin defends copyright as a natural right, citing private royalty systems and equating copying to theft (1:08:46–1:09:25). Kinsella argues copyright stifles speech and that piracy is a positive force against statist control (1:08:30–1:09:31). Hancock emphasizes technology’s role in making copyright unenforceable, citing Napster (1:07:27–1:07:55). Korwin exits, calling anti-IP views sordid, while Kinsella invites him to stay for fairness (1:11:40–1:17:35). Segment 5: Post-Debate Analysis and Libertarian Politics (1:17:43–2:15:31) Description: After Korwin’s departure, Kinsella and Hancock analyze the debate, critiquing Korwin’s reliance on statutory law despite claiming to discuss principles. They discuss how creators like Scott Bieser shifted from pro-IP to anti-IP views after realizing piracy increases notoriety and revenue. Hancock invites Kinsella to contribute to the Pirates Without Borders’ Third Letter of Captain Marque, focusing on communication and IP. The conversation broadens to libertarian politics, with both criticizing the Libertarian Party’s drift toward statism and praising the growing influence of Rothbardian ideas. They discuss the “helicopter meme” controversy involving Hans-Hermann Hoppe and the LP’s attacks on Mises Institute figures, seeing it as a desperate attempt to suppress radical libertarianism. Summary: Kinsella critiques Korwin’s conflation of legal and moral rights, noting piracy’s benefits for creators (1:23:30–1:26:28). Hancock recounts Scott Bieser’s shift and Aaron Russo’s increased earnings from pirated content (1:24:07–1:25:26). Discussion of Pirates Without Borders, with Kinsella agreeing to contribute to the Third Letter (1:29:08–1:32:21). Critique of LP’s attacks on Mises figures, citing the “helicopter” controversy and Sarwark’s petition (1:51:29–2:00:00). Hancock and Kinsella see a cultural shift toward libertarianism, driven by consistent principles (2:05:23–2:08:23). References: Stephan Kinsella’s Against Intellectual Property (Mises Institute). C4SIF.org for Kinsella’s IP resources. Karl Fogel’s article on copyright history (questioncopyright.org, linked at C4SIF.org/resources). Pirates Without Borders (pirateswithoutborders.com) for the Letters of Captain Marque. Rick Falkvinge (falkvinge.net) on piracy and IP. Some of Ernie's shownotes are pasted below.