Add Madison's Fears Of Intellectual Property To Jefferson's

from the be-very,-very-careful dept

A bunch of folks have been pointing me to a series of posts at the Volokh Conspiracy blog concerning intellectual property. The one that kicked it off may be the most interesting. For a while, we've pointed people to Thomas Jefferson's views on "monopolies" and his overall reluctant feeling towards patents and copyrights. Many of Jefferson's feelings on this topic were made clear in letters between himself and James Madison. However, Madison is often credited with convincing Jefferson that patents were necessary when Jefferson was against the idea entirely. The post on Volokh, though, shows that Madison was, like Jefferson, very aware of the dangers of such monopolies and warned that it should only be used in the rarest of cases:
But grants of this sort can be justified in very peculiar cases only, if at all; the danger being very great that the good resulting from the operation of the monopoly, will be overbalanced by the evil effect of the precedent; and it being not impossible that the monopoly itself, in its original operation, may produce more evil than good.
You might want to remember this any time someone insists that the founding fathers were huge supporters of stronger and stronger intellectual property laws.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. icon
    Mike (profile), 20 Jun 2007 @ 10:40am

    Re: read US Constitution

    Mike, you are a clueless moron

    Always nice to hear from you angry dude.

    Just read the US Constitution.

    I have. You, on the other hand, seem to only be selectively reading it.

    "Congress shall have power . . . to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."

    This is not a universal "ok" for patents. It very clearly says that *for the purpose of promoting progress of science and useful arts*. In other words, if it's NOT promoting such progress, it's a problem. And that's true in this case.

    The quotes from Madison and Jefferson -- who were the ones who debated and eventually crafted how this language would be presented -- clearly shows their intentions. It's folks like yourselves who pretend they meant something different.

    Looking at what they said leading up to the creation of the constitution shows their specific fears -- and looking at what's happening today shows that those fears have been realized.

    Folks like you who want to pretend the founding fathers meant something different than they did want to ignore the real purpose of the patent system. Reading what they wrote is important -- no matter how much you don't want to believe it's true.

    Petition the Congress to amend US Constitutuon or just shut up

    There's no need to change the constitution. It's quite clear that patents are only to serve the purpose of promoting progress and innovation. When it's not doing so, those patents are unconstitutional.

    Btw, I've noticed that you never responded to my request to hear about your patent. You also never explained the disparity between claiming you had a patent years ago, and then claiming that you just got your first patent. It would be great if you responded to that, as it would help clarify your position.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Advertisment

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.