***... My view is that anything that chokes back the state-granted patent monopoly is, ceteris paribus, to be favored. And I agree with the general idea that it is detestable for a company to secretly seek patents on the technology of the SSO the company is part of, and that these patents should not be enforceable. The default contractual rule should be that if you work with others to adopt a technological standard, you implicitly agree not to use state-granted patent monopolies on that technology to block or extract royalties from use of that standard. I would say that derogation from this default rule should be explicitly spelled out. Imagine what response you would get from other SSO members if you try to add a clause saying that you may secretly apply for patents and enforce them against other members or companies using the standard.***
Although I agree in principle with him on the above, this so-called "libertarian," STEPHAN KINSELLA should learn more about the law particularly contract law and the Uniform Commercial Code. When he does that, he will write more with clarity and be able to define the legal nuances and discuss the principle of good faith and fair dealing.
Reading his piece, I thought I was reading the thoughts of someone who wants to be a Kant, Rosseau, Calvin or Locke. Kinsella could have used the words "federal government" instead of "state" to avoid any confusion that we have a federal form of government.
However, I did not notice in his article a solicitation for any donation.
jmho.