This website has long advocated digitizing books and making them available on line, at either low prices or free. I would be curious to know if that happens very often. I stumbled on one, the Wiley - Ubuntu Linux Bible at link here.

It is also available from Wiley for $39.33 in hard copy. I think it may be available as a free download for only a limited period of time. The book comes with a CD but Ubuntu will mail you one for free or you can download it, burn a CD and then install it.

This move by the Ubuntu distribution to promote the use of its linux-based operating system reflects an interesting business model, one in which sale of the software is secondary and primary is the sale of follow-on services. But it all depends on the spread of linux, which has had an uphill battle with Microsoft.

A hacker appears to have broken a new encryption system for high definition DVD's (yahoo link here) to allow copying protected movies. I use the word appears, because the hacker has yet to publish the full hack but says he will on January 2. He has, however, published a video suggesting he has done it (youtube link here) and participated in a fascinating discussion thread (forum link here) in which he talks about what he has done, more or less step by step.

The New York Times reports the story but sees the issue mainly as affecting which of the two leading encryption systems will be used by the movie industry (NY Times link here). It conjectures that the system not yet broken now has an advantage and points out that it can be reprogrammed on future production even if broken. The Times also notes that the decrypted system might have a competitive advantage among DVD buyers who want to copy (it seems unlikely that studios would make this choice).

With a lot of luck, this will mark the beginning of the end of the whole encryption system, as there are people who are capable of breaking this form of monopoly in which a buyer's rights to his purchase, the DVD, are severely restricted-–he can't copy it and he can't play it on the device of his choice, much less sell additional copies where competition would drive down the price to no more than the cost of production.

There is pretty widespread agreement that the patent examination system is broken - too many meaningless patents that then are used by trolls for purposes of blackmail. In addition to public efforts to improve the existing system, there are private efforts. Among the most notable is wikipatents, a "wikipedia" like effort to provide community review of patents. Particularly with respect to prior art, where the patent office has not proved particularly knowledgeable, this potentially can lead to a significant improvement in the awarding of patents by providing greater transparency and informational input to the system. Go check it out.

Not too many posts recently from either Michele (well never from him) or me. We've been giving talks in Australia. We talked about IP at the Macrodynamic Conference at the Australia National University in Canberra. I think we raised some questions in the minds of the audience.

I gave a general audience talk on IP at the Treasury. Australia is famously sympathetic to monopolies. Much anti-trust that would be in the Justice Department in the U.S. is in Treasury in Australia. It was quite a pleasure to meet people who not only meant well, but have their heads screwed on straight. There is always a temptation (and perhaps a paper to be written?) for a government to respond to changes in economic circumstances by "doing something" - generally something stupid. It is fortunate for Australia that they have some public servants who understand that generally the best approach is for government to stay out of the way.

I talked also at Melbourne Business School. I wish I could say that my anti-IP talk was the highlight of the day, but I was paired with Eric Von Hippel of MIT whose talk on user driven innovation was the highlight of the day. The short version: most innovation isn't done by business firms at all, it is done by consumers who improve/invent products for their own use. When it turns out the invention is generally useful, often the firms imitate them. His website is highly recommended.

Finally, I'd be remiss not to draw attention to Josh Gans and his excellent website Core Economics. Aside from some comments on IP and Michele's and my work, there is a great deal of excellent stuff. His post on ownership of the last mile should be read by everyone interested in the internet.

This is not about the last crime of some bad monopolist but, rather, it is about disclosing it.

David and I are back to the writing desk, reworking out the Against Intellectual Monopoly book to make it into a more readable one. More precisely, we may be up to writing yet another book, completely different from the one we completed last year, even if on the same line. The idea is to write something really simple, much shorter, with a narrative structure instead of an argumentative one and with dramatic examples of why IP is damaging, instead of statistical tables and case studies.

Hence the request for help and advice. Obviously, there are hundreds of possible examples, many of which this blog has been documenting since its inception. But many of these examples, while important, are too technical, subtle, and "nerdish" to make the average reader of a trade book perceive the seriousness of the matter and its relevance as a public policy issue. In this new book that's what we want to achieve: transmit the dramatic aspect, make the reader aware of how damn serious the whole issue is, for them individually and for milions of people around the world. Hence, we need a few good, well chosen and somewhat capturing examples.

Which cases would you guys consider as paradigmatic of the way in which IP may hurt society? Which stories come to your mind when thinking of a "movie" on how bad IP can get and how badly it can affect people? That's the question. Thanks

The May issue of SFO Stocks, Futures and Options Magazine has an interesting interview with Richard Sandor, Chairman and CEO of the Chicago Climate Exchange. He pioneered the creation of financial futures in the 1970s, including Ginnie Mae futures.
He states that "Financial inventions, like the limited liability corporation, were more important than the steam engine."

He also notes that commoditizing the market for home ownership undermined red lining against single women and minority groups. "You can get a mortgage in 24 hours--you hit the web, you get a certain rate and you close. I think the value of capital market inventions is often significantly underestimated."

Lynn Kiesling wrote an article about the economics of trading credits for greenhouse gases.

None of these innovations have been patented, unlike the steam engine.

Following on David's post about trademarks below, here is the story of the Anti-Defamation League's campaign against groups using "Anti-Defamation League" as a title, including the Anarchists Anti- Defamation League.
The Anti-Defamation League was helped by some court decisions that lowered the bar in determining what constitutes exclusive use of trade names. Its real name is the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith. How on earth anyone could confuse it with the National Mexican American Anti-Defamation Committee or the American Italian Anti-Defamation League, Inc. or the Anarchists Anti-Defamation League is a mystery only a solon could unravel. And we know there are plenty of solons on the bench all over America.

Sheldon Richman has a nice essay about how the WTO and developed nations are taxing developing nations for the use of ideas. He also provides a nice explanation of the "natural rights" perspective on intellectual property

But how does one own an idea once it leaves the confines of one's mind? At that point, other people have copies in their minds. To interfere with their use of their copies is to violate their freedom. If you've invented and patented the wheelbarrow and I see you using it as I pass your property, no theory of natural justice can insist that I have no right to use my own materials to make a copy of the wheelbarrow. Not only that: no theory of natural justice can insist that I have no right to sell to willing buyers the wheelbarrows I make. But patent law would stop me. Similarly, copyright law prevents me, even in the absence of contract, from nonfraudulently using as I see fit the books and recording media that I purchase.

On the mercantilism front, I will add my own experience. I was at a conference in Barcelona sponsored by the World Bank, and an economist who worked for one of the European intellectual property bureaucracies said intellectual property was good for developing nations - that it would lead to a great increase in innovation in the third world. I objected, and said that while economists disagreed about a lot of things having to do with intellectual property, the one thing we pretty much all agreed on was that forcing IP on developing countries couldn't possibly be good for them - no one who has studied or thought about the matter thinks the incentive effect in encouraging new innovation could possibly be strong enough to offset the enormous cost of having to pay the developed world for all existing ideas. There were quite a few economists at the conference - none objected to my statement.

Courtesy of Juan Dubra and his students. The article is here.

The Case Against Intellectual Property at economicprincipals.com