PDA

View Full Version : Any libertarian articles on False Advertising and Truth in Labeling laws?




RCA
05-05-2010, 02:42 PM
I assume the libertarian viewpoint is "buyer beware" or "seek private certification", but I'm looking for a good writeup on this topic since this argument is often used by liberals to support government regulation.

WaltM
05-05-2010, 06:22 PM
Good question, does a person have an entitlement to the truth?

The logical extension of "buyer beware" is "fraud is OK, since you had the right and responsibility to do all the research possible"

mczerone
05-05-2010, 06:30 PM
Fraud is aggression: claiming that you are trading X for Y, when you really are giving something worthless, is equivalent to stealing Y.

You would be entitled to rescission of the deal (getting Y back), and the fraudster would be liable for any causal damage you might have for not having that trade work out.

Now, not making any claims at all about the effects or status of an object is a case where the buyer needs to investigate.

This is really the only form of "intellectual property" that's valid, where someone claims they are selling "an original Picasso", when its really a well-crafted forgery. Merely selling it as "A Picasso-style" artwork can't be infringement, but claiming that it is what it isn't is theft.

WaltM
05-05-2010, 06:35 PM
Fraud is aggression: claiming that you are trading X for Y, when you really are giving something worthless, is equivalent to stealing Y.


WTF?

How is fraud aggression? What force did you use?
How is it stealing?




You would be entitled to rescission of the deal (getting Y back), and the fraudster would be liable for any causal damage you might have for not having that trade work out.

Now, not making any claims at all about the effects or status of an object is a case where the buyer needs to investigate.

This is really the only form of "intellectual property" that's valid, where someone claims they are selling "an original Picasso", when its really a well-crafted forgery. Merely selling it as "A Picasso-style" artwork can't be infringement, but claiming that it is what it isn't is theft.

Matt Collins
05-05-2010, 06:36 PM
I wouldn't call it "Aggression" but it is definitely deception which is not just.

WaltM
05-05-2010, 06:37 PM
This is really the only form of "intellectual property" that's valid, where someone claims they are selling "an original Picasso", when its really a well-crafted forgery. Merely selling it as "A Picasso-style" artwork can't be infringement, but claiming that it is what it isn't is theft.

So when a person pirates a copy of a CD, does he need to admit he's made the copy without permission and has no rights to distribute additional copies, in order to be free from fraud accusations?

Zippyjuan
05-05-2010, 06:45 PM
A true free market requires that people in the market have access to accurate information on which to base their decisions on what they do. If businesses are allowed to lie (freedom of speech or simply because you are opposed to any restrictions on them) that impedes a free market from functioning properly. Therefore if you support free markets you should also support requirements for giving out accurate or misleading or even wrong information.

mczerone
05-05-2010, 06:47 PM
So when a person pirates a copy of a CD, does he need to admit he's made the copy without permission and has no rights to distribute additional copies, in order to be free from fraud accusations?

No, he's just not free to claim that its his performance recorded on the disc.

WaltM
05-05-2010, 07:00 PM
No, he's just not free to claim that its his performance recorded on the disc.

so if both him (the copier) and the buyer agree that it's OK, you believe that the 3rd party (original copyright holder) has nothing to say and nobody is harmed?

or doesn't that constitute a conspiracy of depriving the original composer?