Intellectual Property - Economics

The topic of what is often called intellectual property is a good topic for discussion. It is pertinent and has those for it and those against it. Robert, from http://makingmyway.org/, responded to a comment I made on one of his posts (I'm the one quoted in the innermost blockquotes):

I would have to say that laws creating intellectual “property” do in fact create artificial scarcity.

My problem with this is if the IP laws didn’t exist, the good wouldn’t exist to have an “artificial scarcity” of in the first place. It’s exactly analogous to music or other intellectual or creative property, and why I asked, “Are artists creating ‘artificial scarcity’ when they charge for their works, thus preventing those who can’t pay (or won’t) from enjoying them?”

Intellectual property law is artificial as it is a non-market force that prevents economic agents from freely using the resources they have, namely ideas.

I disagree. IP law is akin to property rights law. You say it prevents economic agents from using the resources they have, but I ask, whose resources? If I write a very popular book, is it “your resource” to use as you wish, up to and including re-printing it under your name?

-------------------

I'm posting this here, so we can try and have a more in depth discussion of the topic, taking points one by one if possible and not unnecessarily breaking up the conversation.