C4SIF.org

In a recent podcast episode ,Greenland, Guns, and Money, Richard Epstein predicts Trump’s use of tariffs under IEEPA might be nixed by the Supreme Court, and that he has suggested that if this happens he will find some other way to do it, but it’s not clear what.

There is a recent IPWatchdog podcast interview of Gil Hyatt, Pioneering AI Innovations and Legacy: A Conversation with Inventor Gil Hyatt / IPWatchdog Unleashed, by patent shill and blowhard-buffoon Gene Quinn, who has never met a patent he doens’t like (he has argued for a “patent stimulus plan”: “If we really want to get out of this economic downturn we need a Patent Stimulus Plan. … What we need to do is have President Obama issue an Executive Order directing the Patent Office to start allowing patents.” ).¹

[continue reading…]

1. A “Patent Stimulus” to End the Recession? [↩]

I often rail against IP because it impedes innovation.¹ As I wrote in one post,

Patent law distorts and impedes innovation. It makes us all poorer. There is no evidence that it does what the retarded Founders thought it would do—promote the progress of the useful arts (inventions)

… Patent law reduces innovation and impoverishes the human race. As I wrote elsewhere: [continue reading…]

1.  IP Answer Man: Death Toll of Patent Law; The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism. [↩]

Related:

• All-In Podcast Concerned But Confused about IP and AI Training
• Whereupon Grok admits it (and AI) is severely gimped by copyright law
• Libertarian and IP Answer Man: Artificial Intelligence and IP
• Copyright Thicket and President Trump’s AI Training Data Solution
• Copying, Patent Infringement, Copyright Infringement are not “Theft”, Stealing, Piracy, Plagiarism, Knocking Off, Ripping Off
• Stop calling patent and copyright “property”; stop calling copying “theft” and “piracy”
• All-In Podcast Concern over China and IP “Theft”
• Lacalle on China and IP “Theft”
• Bullard, “Is Intellectual Property Theft?”
• Patent trolls as mafioso (and that’s a compliment)

I woke up this morning to my daily NY Times news brief email, only to find embedded therein this propaganda, the “Stealing Isn’t Innovation” campaign, which is “a project of the Human Artistry Campaign, a global coalition of more than 180 groups around the world supporting responsible, ethical AI.” The letter’s A and I in the slogan are highlighted in blue to drive the point home—this is about killing AI. It’s a group of artists and other copyright whores who want to shakedown AI tech companies with the threat of killing it with copyright. [continue reading…]

Related

• Types of Intellectual Property
• IP Proponents Do Not Even Know The Difference Between Patent, Copyright, Trademark … 
• right to publicity/invasion of privacy
• The Rise Of A New Intellectual Property Category, Ripe For Trolling: Publicity Rights
• The Problem with Intellectual Property, n.9

As a friend told me, “I saw this article, and thought you might either be amused or horrified as congress attempts to use copyright law to solve problems caused by … copyright law.”

Trey Popp, Who Will Own Your Digital Twin?, The Pennsylvania Gazette (24 Dec 2025) [continue reading…]

Patent holders just hate any challenges to their state-granted patent monopolies.¹ They want their IP rights to be treated like “property rights,”² and never challenged, either administratively or in court, so that they can be “relied upon”³ and serve as more effective weapons to threaten and extort their victims.⁴ They also hate legislative proposals that would make it more difficult to engage in patent trolling,⁵ such as The Litigation Transparency Act of 2025⁶ or the more recent bill proposed by Representative Daryl Issa, The Protecting Third Party Litigation Funding from Abuse Act.⁷ [continue reading…]

1. US Inventor, INVENTOR RIGHTS RESOLUTION, which, in crayon, writes “The USPTO MUST NOT REVIEW AN ISSUED PATENT WITHOUT CONSENT OF THE INVENTOR.”  [↩]
2. The Structural Unity of Real and Intellectual Property; The “Ontology” Mistake of Libertarian Creationists; Objectivists: “All Property is Intellectual Property”; A Recurring Fallacy: “IP is a Purer Form of Property than Material Resources”. [↩]
3. Industry Opposition to Patent Challenges. [↩]
4. Patent trolls as mafioso (and that’s a compliment); “Investment Grade Patents are not for Rent Seeking … They are for business negotiations”; Hsieh and Mossoff on IP and Sewing Machines. [↩]
5. Patent Trolls, Bad Patents, and Incompetent Examiners are Not the Problem.  [↩]
6. Issa, House Colleagues Launch Reform of Third-Party Financed Civil Litigation, Issa Press Release (Feb. 7, 2025); H.R.1109 – Litigation Transparency Act of 2025. [↩]
7. H.R. 7015 (IH) – Protecting Third Party Litigation Funding From Abuse Act; Chad Hemenway, APCIA Backs Federal Bill to Require Litigation Funding Disclosure, Insurance Journal (Jan. 13, 2026).  [↩]

Related:

• A patent on patenting…

When I was practicing patent law with Schnader Harrison and then Duane Morris in Philadelphia, I was Editor-in-Chief/Founding member, PBA IP Law Section [archived] Newsletter, 1997–98.¹ In one issue (PBA IP Law Newsletter (Summer 1998)), I posted this: [continue reading…]

1. See also “Is Intellectual Property Legitimate?“, Pennsylvania Bar Association Intellectual Property Newsletter 1 (Winter 1998): 3; republished in the Federalist Society’s Intellectual Property Practice Group Newsletter, vol. 3, Issue 3 (Winter 2000) [Audio: KOL445]. [↩]

From StephanKinsella.com:

***

Jeffrey Tucker’s recent article, “Small Steps Toward Medical Freedom,” The Epoch Times (Jan. 6, 2026) has several provocative “urgent priorities for U.S. medical-insurance reform”. Writes Tucker: [continue reading…]

These geniuses seem to attack capitalism and lack of competition, and identify some extensions or uses patent and copyright (intellectual property), but they do not condemn IP per se. No one can ever clearly see the problem or strike at the root. https://t.co/jPzMozEwFn…

— Stephan Kinsella (@NSKinsella) December 21, 2025

Jonathan Tepper and Denise Hearn, The Myth of Capitalism: Monopolies and the Death of Competition (2019) [continue reading…]

[From my Webnote series]

Related:

• Types of Intellectual Property
• Copying, Patent Infringement, Copyright Infringement are not “Theft”, Stealing, Piracy, Plagiarism, Knocking Off, Ripping Off
• Stop calling patent and copyright “property”; stop calling copying “theft” and “piracy”
• All-In Podcast Concern over China and IP “Theft”
• Lacalle on China and IP “Theft”
• Bullard, “Is Intellectual Property Theft?”
• Intellectual Property versus Intellectual Property Rights
• Libertarian and Lockean Creationism: Creation As a Source of Wealth, not Property Rights; Hayek’s “Fund of Experience”; the Distinction Between Scarce Means and Knowledge as Guides to Action

“advocates for IP often cannot distinguish patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret from each other (and yet support them anyway)” The Problem with Intellectual Property, n.30

See also:

• “most of them do not and do not even know the difference between the different types of IP that they mindlessly support”. Objectivism and the Patent Bargain  See comments about Orbaugh in KOL458 | Patent and Copyright versus Innovation, Competition, and Property Rights (APEE Guatemala 2025).
• “IP has nothing to do with plagiarism or fraud. This is a common confusion, often deliberately and dishonestly spread by those with vested IP interests trying to defend IP law; or by people who are ignorant about the differences yet feel compelled to pontificate on this topic in public anyway.” Intellectual Property Discussion with Mark Skousen

[From my Webnote series]

Art doesn’t belong to the artist even before it’s public. Information is not ownable since it does not exist independently, it needs a substrate or carrier; it is just the way an underlying object is arranged or impatterned. The physical object itself which is impatterned is…

— Stephan Kinsella (@NSKinsella) December 8, 2025

[continue reading…]

Louis Rossmann has been criticizing the use of copyright to prevent owners of products from repairing them for some time:

Of course, this is all because of copyright.

See also Brian X. Chen, “Why One Man Is Fighting for Our Right to Control Our Garage Door Openers,” New York Times (Dec. 4, 2025), which also cannot be read because copyright protects its paywall.

Related:

• “US Inventor” upset at patent challenges and Issa transparency and litigation reforms
• All Quiet on the PTAB Front: USPTO Proposes More Major Restrictions to Inter Partes Review Institution, Patently-O (Oct. 16, 2025)
• Instacart Challenges USPTO’s Discretionary IPR Denials in Seventh Pending Mandamus Petition, Patently-O (Oct. 26, 2025)
• Eileen McDermott, “USPTO Issues NPRM on IPR Practice, Withdraws Vidal-Era Proposal,” IP Watchdog (Oct. 16, 2025)
• Eileen McDermott, Current and Former Lawmakers Lock Horns in Comments on USPTO’s Proposed PTAB Changes, IP Watchdog (Dec. 3, 2025)

Which Path for Patent Challenges? The USPTO’s “One-Challenge” NPRM for Inter Partes Review (Nov. 20, 2025), a recent Federalist Society panel webinar discussing the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) titled “Revision to Rules of Practice Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board,” which proposes significant changes to how inter partes review (IPR) petitions are instituted. [continue reading…]

nb @NSKinsella pic.twitter.com/ouu4CeRwNa

— Kadaververwertungsanstalt (@witheredsummer) December 2, 2025