0

Other libertarian proponents of IP argue that certainideas deserve protection as property rights because theyare created. Rand supported patents and copyrights as “thelegal implementation of the base of all property rights: aman’s right to the product of his mind.” For Rand, IPrights are, in a sense, the reward for productive work. It isonly fair that a creator reap the benefits of others using hiscreation. For this reason, in part, she opposes perpetualpatent and copyright—because future, unborn heirs of theoriginal creator are not themselves responsible for the creationof their ancestors’ work.

Advocates of IP often justify it on utilitarian grounds.Utilitarians hold that the “end” of encouraging more innovationand creativity justifies the seemingly immoral “means” of restricting the freedom of individuals to usetheir physical property as they see fit. But there are threefundamental problems with justifying any right or law onstrictly utilitarian grounds.

Libertarian views on IP range from complete supportof the fullest gamut of IP imaginable, to outright oppositionto IP rights. Most of the debate about IP concernspatent and copyright; as discussed below, trademark andtrade secret are less problematic. Therefore, this articlefocuses primarily on the legitimacy of patent and copyright.