Sinclair Davidson and Jason Potts write,
We propose a new model of intellectual property based on the stationary bandit model of government. We argue that new ideas—of the sort that become patents, copyrights and trademarks—emerge as economic rights, born global as it were into a world of roving bandits. They seek protection from a stationary bandit, who extracts tribute in return. The key insight of our new model, however, is a sharper distinction of who those bandits are.
…vulnerable subjects seek protection for their private economic property from the banditry of other governments, by registering their property with their own government, whom they trust to be powerful enough to protect it as they peacefully engage in trade and commerce throughout the world.
In return, they grant that government an exclusive right to exploit them through perpetual taxation of the property.
Pointer from Scott Sumner. This theory suggests that the country that ends up with the largest sector of copy-able products (pharmaceuticals, movies, novels, etc.) will be the country with the largest navy. Hmmm…
“We argue that new ideas—of the sort that become patents, copyrights and trademarks—emerge as economic rights, born global as it were into a world of roving bandits.”
This seems like a very twisted definition of “economic rights”, and doesn’t at all fit current world at all. How does is this description better than that of patent holders as rent seekers?
Innovators as bandits colluding with governments as enforcers? Why wouldn’t government be entitled to their share of what wouldn’t exist without them? They needn’t pay government at all, merely place it in the public domain. Bandits all.