Fikri Mülkiyete Liberteryen Bakış: Deontolojik ve Sonuçsalcı Yaklaşımlar

Yıl 2024, , 21 - 44, 22.06.2024

Dilara Buket Didin

https://doi.org/10.36484/liberal.1448987

Cited By: 1

Öz

Son yıllarda giderek artan sayıda liberteryen, fikri mülkiyet haklarının meşruiyetin- den şüphe duymaya başlamıştır. Liberteryenler, “sonuçsalcı” ve “deontolojik” olmak üzere iki felsefi çizgide konumlandırılabilir. Sonuçsalcı çizgidekiler, “laissez faire”in, toplumun tüm üyeleri ya da en azından çoğu tarafından tercih edilen fayda mak- simizasyonunu gerçekleştireceği fikrine dayanmakta; deontolojik çizgidekiler ise ahlaki normlardan hareket etmektedir. Makalede bu ayrıma istinaden fikri mülkiyeti kabul eden ve reddeden liberteryenlerin görüşleri ikiye ayrılarak incelenmiştir. Ayrıca liberteryen düşünürlerin görüşleri, ilk olarak öncü ve daha sonra modern liberteryenler olmak üzere kronolojik olarak ele alınmıştır. Son olarak bu makalenin temel odağı telif hakkı ve patenttir. Zira fikri mülkiyetle ilgili tartışmaların çoğunun telif hakkı ve patentin meşruiyetine odaklanmaktadır. Fikri mülkiyeti deontolojik çizgiden kabul eden düşünürler, Locke’çu emek teorisinden hareket etmekte; reddedenler, fikri mülkiyetin diğer insanların özgürlüğünü sınırlandıran devlet imtiyazları olduğunu ileri sürmektedir. Sonuçsalcı yaklaşımdan fikri mülkiyeti kabul edenler ise fikri mülkiyetin inovasyona teşvik ederek faydayı artırdığını iddia etmekte, reddedenler de bunun aksini savunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Fikri mülkiyet, liberteryenizm, telif hakkı, patent

A Libertarian View of Intellectual Property: Deontological and Consequentialist Approaches

Öz

In recent years, a growing number of libertarians have begun to doubt the legitimacy of intellectual property (IP) rights. Libertarians can be positioned along two philosophical lines: “Consequentialist” and “deontological”. Consequentialists believe that laissez-faire will lead to utility maximization preferred by all or at least most members of society; deontologists are guided by moral norms. Based on this distinction, the article analyzes the views of libertarians who accept and reject IP. In addition, the views of libertarians are analyzed chronologically, first the pioneer and then the modern. Finally, the main focus of this article is copyrights and patents. This is because most of the debates on IP focus on the legitimacy of copyrights and patents. Thinkers who accept IP from the deontological line are based on Lockean labor theory; those who reject it argue that IP is a state privilege that limits the freedom of other people. Those who accept IP from a consequentialist approach argue that IP increases utility by encouraging innovation, while those who reject it argue the opposite.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Intellectual property, libertarianism, copyright, patent

Kaynakça

• Barnett, R. E. (2007). Modern Liberteryenizmin Ahlâkî Temelleri. (çev. Mustafa Erdoğan). Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, 12(45), 9-26.
• Block, W. E. (2011). David Friedman and libertarianism: A critique. Libertarian Papers, 3, 1-34.
• Boaz, D. (2015). The libertarian mind: a manifesto for freedom. Simon&Schuster.
• Boldrin, M., ve Levine, D. K. (2008). Against Intellectual Monopoly. Cambridge University Press.
• Boldrin, M., ve Levine, D. K. (2010). Does Intellectual Monopoly Help Innovation. Indian J. Intell. Prop. L., 3, 1-36.
• Chandra, R. (2012). Knowledge as property: issues in the moral grounding of intellectual property rights. Oxford University Press.
• D’Amato, D. (2014). Libertarian Views of Intellectual Property: Rothbard, Tucker, Spooner, and Rand. https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/libertarian-views-intellectual-pro- perty-rothbard-tucker-spooner-rand, (21.01.2023).
• Dülger, M. (2023). Anarko-Bireyci Bir Doğal Hukuk Yorumu: Lysander Spooner ve Hukuk Teorisi. İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, 81(2), 507-529.
• Fisher, William W. (2001). Theories of Intellectual Property. Stephen Munzer (Ed.). New Es- says in the Legal and Political Theory of Property içinde (s. 168-208). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Friedman, D. (1993). Standards as intellectual property: an economic approach. U. Dayton L. Rev., 19, 1109-1130.
• Hettinger, E. C. (1989). Justifying intellectual property. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 18(1), 31-52.
• Himma, K. E. (2008). The justification of intellectual property: Contemporary philosophical disputes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(7), 1143-1161.
• Hoppe, H. H. (2010). A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
• Hoppe, H. H. (2012). The Great Fiction Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline. Baltimore: Laissez Faire Books.
• Hopper, Z. (2013). Thomas Pogge And The Two Types Of Libertarian (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Georgia State University College of Arts and Sciences.
• Horra, L. P. (2017, 9 Kasım). Lysander Spooner: The Libertarian Anarchist. Erişim adresi: https://austriancenter.com/lysander-spooner-libertarian-anarchist/, (20.02.2024).
• İnce, M. (2019). Lysander Spooner’in Siyaset ve Hukuk Teorisi. Coşkun Can Aktan ve Ahmet Taner (Ed.). Liberteryenizm ve Anarko-Kapitalizm içinde (s. 180-196). SOBİAD Hukuk ve İktisat Araştırmaları Yayınları.
• Kinsella, N. S. (1998). Is intellectual property legitimate?. Pennsylvania Bar Association Intellectual Property Law Newsletter, 3, Winter, 1-3.
• Kinsella, N. S. (2008). Against Intellectual Property. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
• Kinsella, N. S. (2009). Intellectual Property and Libertarianism. Liberty, 23(11), 27-30, 45-46.
• Kinsella, N. S. (2013). Law and Intellectual Property in Stateless Society. Libertarian Papers, 5, 1-44.
• Kinsella, N. S. (2023). Legal Foundations of a Free Society. Houston: Papinian Press.
• Lee, A. (2013). Intellectual Property, Moral Rights, and Social Utility: A Classically Liberal Exploration of the Normative and Practical Implications of Intellectual Property Rights. NYUJL & Liberty, 7, 428-463.
• Leggett, W. (1984). Democratic Editorials: Essays in Jacksonian Political Economy. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
• Lewin, P. (2007). Creativity or coercion: Alternative perspectives on rights to intellectual property. Journal of business ethics, 71, 441-455.
• Locke, J. (2021). Yönetim Üzerine İkinci İnceleme Sivil Yönetimin Gerçek Kökeni, Boyutu ve Amacı Üzerine Bir Deneme. (çev. Fahri Bakırcı). 6. Baskı. Ankara: Serbest Kitaplar.
• Long, R. (2011). The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights. Gary Chartier and Charles W. Johnson (Ed.). Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty içinde (s. 187-198). London: Minor Compositions.
• McElroy, W. (2011). Contra copyright, again. Libertarian Papers, 3(12), 1-10. Milsted Jr., C. S. (2009). Bridging the Two Libertarianisms. Liberty, 23(11), 35-38. Narveson, J. (2007). The Free Society. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, 12(45), 57-66.
• Nozick, R. (2006). Anarşi, Devlet ve Ütopya. (çev. Alişan Oktay). 2. Baskı. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Palmer, T. G. (1988). Intellectual property: a non-posnerian law and economics approach. Hamline L. Rev., 12, 261-304.
• Palmer, T. G. (1990). Are patents and copyrights morally justified-the philosophy of property rights and ideal objects. Harv. JL & Pub. Pol’y, 13(3), 817-865.
• Papaioannou, T. (2006). Towards a critique of the moral foundations of intellectual property rights. Journal of Global Ethics, 2(1), 67-90.
• Rand, A., Branden, N., Greenspan, A., ve Hessen, R. (1986). Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. Signet.
• Rothbard, M. N. (2009). Man, Economy, and State A Treatise on Economic Principles with power and market government and the economy. Second Edition, Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
• Salih, L. (2015). A Libertarian Defence of Intellectual Property. Rerum Causae, 7(2), 161-182. Sandefur, T. (2007). A critique of Ayn Rand’s theory of intellectual property rights. The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, 9(1), 139-161. Shaffer, B. (2013). A Libertarian Critique of Intellectual Property. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
• Soepboer, M. (2009). Libertarian views on intellectual property law: An analysis of laissez- faire theories applied on the modern day IP system (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). University of Cape Town School for Advanced Legal Studies.
• Sonderholm, J. (2010). Ethical issues surrounding intellectual property rights. Philosophy Compass, 5(12), 1107-1115.
• Spooner, L. (1855). The Law of Intellectual Property; or An Essay on the Right of Authors and Inventors to a Perpetual Property in their Ideas. Vol. I, Boston: Bela Marsh.
• Stainton, R. (2015). Dil Felsefesi. (çev.: Yeşil, M.). Fırat Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(1), 165-175.
• Sterckx, S. (2006). The moral justifiability of patents. Ethical Perspectives, 13(2), 249-265. Taner, A. (2013). Çağdaş Liberalizmde Yeni Yol Ayrımı: Anarko Kapitalist Liberalizme Karşı Minimal Devletçi Liberalizm. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, (70), 227-243.
• Tatar, D. B. (2014). Mülkiyet ve Fikri Mülkiyetin Felsefi Temelleri. Ankara: Astana Yayınları.
• Tucker, B. (1890). More on Copyright. Liberty. Vol.: VII, No.: 18, Whole No.: 174, 4-5.
• Tucker, B. (1891). The Knot-Hole in the Fence. Liberty. Vol.: VII, No.: 26, Whole No.: 182, 5-6.
• Tucker, B. R. (1926). Individual liberty: selections from the writings of Benjamin R. Tucker. C. L. S. (Ed.). New York: Vanguard Press.
• Wiśniewski, J. (2020). On the impossibility of intellectual property. Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 23(1), 33-45.