In response to Tony Smith’s letter regarding the patent system, I would like to point out several errors in his argument. First, Mr. Smith questions the “assumption” that intellectual property rights further the public good. This argument is a straw man.

Intellectual property rights are not designed to protect some alleged “public good,” but instead to secure the right of individuals to the property of their own minds. Because the most valuable human resource is the human mind, it is essential that scientists, engineers and writers be protected from having their work usurped by others after spending months or years of their lives developing an idea, invention or piece of writing.

The supposed “hampering” of development caused by patent law is also misplaced. The precondition to the development or creation of anything, whether software or novel, is the assurance that the creator will be the owner of his own work and be able to reap the rewards of his own effort.

Without intellectual property rights, the innovation that Mr. Smith desires would grind to a screeching halt as creators realize the futility of devoting years of their life to creations that can be freely stolen by anyone at their whim.

Another faulty premise of his argument is that by virtue of being motivated by profit, corporations represent a “pernicious” threat to the objectivity of science. Aside from completely ignoring the facts of the matter, it also ignores the theory.

Corporations have the most pressing motive of all to remain true to science and discover the nature of the world: profit. As evidence, attempt to explain how private individuals and companies have made such incredible discoveries in medicine, engineering and technology while simultaneously being hostile to science.

Capitalism and the free market, you will find, are the best friends science has ever had.

Finally, I want to challenge the notion of the “public good.” This term is necessarily ambiguous and vague because it attempts to describe something that doesn’t exist.

The “public” is nothing more than an abstraction of individuals, and thus the only “public good” is the “individual good.” Attempting to circumvent the intellectual property rights of any individual, especially those who achieve success in the intellectual realm, for the alleged benefit of others is no benefit at all. The only way to achieve the “public good” is the unwavering protection of individual rights.

Noah Stahl

Senior

Computer Engineering