A Rhetorical Response to Boldrin & Levine: Against Intellectual (Property) Extremism
-
Charles McManis
Abstract
The two sides of the contemporary debate over intellectual property agree that the law needs to “strike a balance” between providing sufficient incentive for creation and the freedom to make use of existing ideas. Michele Boldrin and David Levine, on the other hand, boldly declare in their recent work “Against Intellectual Monopoly” that they have arrived at conclusions that “are at variance with both sides.” In this commentary, I examine 1) their assertion that intellectual property should be viewed as an “intellectual monopoly”; 2) their claim to have mustered evidence and authorities showing that innovators and creators can be well protected in the absence of intellectual property law; and 3) their rhetorical practices throughout the book. I conclude that 1) their assertion that intellectual property constitutes an “intellectual monopoly” is itself a bad analogy and an example of the logical fallacy of hasty generalization; 2) the evidence and authorities they muster in support of their claim that innovators and creators can be well protected in the absence of intellectual property law are unpersuasive, as they actually tend to support the opposite conclusion; and 3) their book as a whole is an example of bad rhetorical argumentation.
©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Article
- Introduction: The Kauffman Foundation Conference on Intellectual Property and Innovation
- Does Intellectual Monopoly Help Innovation?
- A Cautious Defense of Intellectual Oligopoly With Fringe Competition
- Evaluating the Economic Performance of Property Systems
- Copyright Abolition and Attribution
- A Rhetorical Response to Boldrin & Levine: Against Intellectual (Property) Extremism
- Watt, Again? Boldrin and Levine Still Exaggerate the Adverse Effect of Patents on the Progress of Steam Power
- Responding to the Challenges of "Against Intellectual Monopoly"
- A Recommendation on How to Intelligently Approach Emerging Problems in Intellectual Property Systems
Articles in the same Issue
- Article
- Introduction: The Kauffman Foundation Conference on Intellectual Property and Innovation
- Does Intellectual Monopoly Help Innovation?
- A Cautious Defense of Intellectual Oligopoly With Fringe Competition
- Evaluating the Economic Performance of Property Systems
- Copyright Abolition and Attribution
- A Rhetorical Response to Boldrin & Levine: Against Intellectual (Property) Extremism
- Watt, Again? Boldrin and Levine Still Exaggerate the Adverse Effect of Patents on the Progress of Steam Power
- Responding to the Challenges of "Against Intellectual Monopoly"
- A Recommendation on How to Intelligently Approach Emerging Problems in Intellectual Property Systems
