WEBVTT

NOTE Against Intellectual Monopoly

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:12.460
My great pleasure to be visiting with Michele Boldreen, who is the co-author of Against

2
00:00:12.460 --> 00:00:17.960
Intellectual Monopoly, a book that came out last year, wasn't it?

3
00:00:17.960 --> 00:00:20.960
It came out in August 2008, yes.

4
00:00:20.960 --> 00:00:21.960
2008.

5
00:00:21.960 --> 00:00:25.760
And it was only this year that I had, I got around to reading it.

6
00:00:25.760 --> 00:00:27.240
And it really rocked my world.

7
00:00:27.240 --> 00:00:31.240
I've written, I think, something like 20 articles on the book itself.

8
00:00:31.240 --> 00:00:37.240
Yeah, we are even shocked by the responsibility you're placing on us.

9
00:00:37.240 --> 00:00:43.240
Well, I really do consider it to be one of the most important books of our time.

10
00:00:43.240 --> 00:00:45.240
I mean, it's not the most important book.

11
00:00:45.240 --> 00:00:53.240
One of the points you make about the problem of intellectual monopoly is that it can cripple economic growth.

12
00:00:53.240 --> 00:00:58.560
Growth. And this was a point I had never really considered. Can you talk just a few minutes

13
00:00:58.560 --> 00:00:59.560
about that?

14
00:00:59.560 --> 00:01:08.000
Well, yeah, let's try. Well, our view is the following. There are two aspects essentially

15
00:01:08.000 --> 00:01:18.040
that we think are relevant. One is basically growth comes from competition. It comes from,

16
00:01:18.040 --> 00:01:22.080
if you want, well-regulated and well-organized competition, but it comes from competition.

17
00:01:22.080 --> 00:01:29.320
Roth comes from the effort the humans put in trying to do things better than their fellows

18
00:01:29.320 --> 00:01:34.600
do, because in that way, they can make a buck or two.

19
00:01:34.600 --> 00:01:39.520
A very simple way of seeing competition, I think, is this.

20
00:01:39.520 --> 00:01:45.640
And so anything that's stifled competition, and it replaces it either with monopoly or

21
00:01:45.640 --> 00:01:56.840
Other Organizations of Economic Activity has a negative impact on the incentive to innovate.

22
00:01:56.840 --> 00:02:04.920
So in particular, think of markets that are monopolized because of patents.

23
00:02:04.920 --> 00:02:09.940
What you have there is certainly the guy that got the patent, the company that got the patent

24
00:02:09.940 --> 00:02:15.360
innovated at the beginning maybe in the expectation, the desire of getting the monopoly.

25
00:02:15.360 --> 00:02:20.700
But as we know the monopoly that the patent gives, but as we know there is a lot of contemporaneous

26
00:02:20.700 --> 00:02:25.440
innovation and a lot of simultaneous effort to achieve certain things.

27
00:02:25.440 --> 00:02:32.560
The fact that someone wins out of 10 and gets the big prize, puts immediately off the other

28
00:02:32.560 --> 00:02:33.560
nine.

29
00:02:33.560 --> 00:02:36.160
So it's productive capacity that is restricted.

30
00:02:36.160 --> 00:02:43.200
Not only puts off the other nine in that specific instance, but it may put them off for a while

31
00:02:43.200 --> 00:02:47.840
Because once you realize that somebody got the patent that you cannot fight against and

32
00:02:47.840 --> 00:02:51.040
you cannot get the license, then you give up.

33
00:02:51.040 --> 00:02:54.840
Sometimes you stay in if you think you can outdo the person, but you have to be very

34
00:02:54.840 --> 00:02:58.440
confident you can outdo that firm very much.

35
00:02:58.440 --> 00:03:01.440
If you don't, then you give up, you move to something else.

36
00:03:01.440 --> 00:03:06.760
And that is lost competition, lost innovation, that's one dimension.

37
00:03:06.760 --> 00:03:11.240
Second dimension, which is also very relevant and it's becoming more and more relevant in

38
00:03:11.240 --> 00:03:16.840
In advanced technologies, things that people call complex technologies, and the typical

39
00:03:16.840 --> 00:03:24.120
example these days are software-related stuff, bioengineering, medical things.

40
00:03:24.120 --> 00:03:32.200
The new products come out literally by reassembling and using dozens, hundreds of previous products.

41
00:03:32.200 --> 00:03:36.200
Where previous products are maybe the innovation of two years ago, three years ago, five years

42
00:03:36.200 --> 00:03:44.440
In a world where all those previous innovations are patented, you create a dramatic problem

43
00:03:44.440 --> 00:03:50.200
for the new innovators. Instead of having free access to the inputs in a competitive

44
00:03:50.200 --> 00:03:58.360
market, they are forced to purchase at monopoly price most of their inputs. Not only, some

45
00:03:58.360 --> 00:04:04.520
of the producers of those inputs may have a strategic interest to prevent the new product

46
00:04:04.520 --> 00:04:09.880
from coming in, because you may replace theirs.

47
00:04:09.880 --> 00:04:14.160
People have given to these phenomena various names, you know, the tragedy of the uncommons

48
00:04:14.160 --> 00:04:18.080
and so on, but it's quite clear what the mechanism is.

49
00:04:18.080 --> 00:04:22.600
So you can argue this theoretically with very many tools.

50
00:04:22.600 --> 00:04:23.600
You can look at the data.

51
00:04:23.600 --> 00:04:30.040
There's extensive empirical work in the software industry in particular showing that this is

52
00:04:30.040 --> 00:04:34.360
taking place and has taken place since copyright first and then patents became particularly

53
00:04:34.360 --> 00:04:43.360
is strong, but it's a major pullback on innovative activity. So those are the two main things we see.

54
00:04:43.360 --> 00:05:01.360
And you see it not only in our world today, but you look back through economic history and observe this again and again, where the patents and the copyrights are taking over national economies, the growth goes down. It's restricted relative to what it is in an open source world.

55
00:05:01.360 --> 00:05:06.360
Yes, that's the other thing. So then there is the practical experience, the historical experience, right?

56
00:05:06.360 --> 00:05:13.360
One goes and looks at what happened in various industries over time and in different centuries and in different countries

57
00:05:13.360 --> 00:05:17.360
and you see this phenomenon repeating over and over and over, right?

58
00:05:17.360 --> 00:05:22.360
New industries, and again, the software industry is perfect, but we can use other.

59
00:05:22.360 --> 00:05:30.360
You see the new industry when a new bunch of products come around, a new technology is found.

60
00:05:30.360 --> 00:05:36.720
You see dozens of entrants. You see great growth. A lot of small firms come in and everybody

61
00:05:36.720 --> 00:05:40.600
tries to use the thing and make little improvement. You have enormous growth. That's exactly what

62
00:05:40.600 --> 00:05:47.120
happened with PCs, with modern software and so on. And those periods are a period of enormous

63
00:05:47.120 --> 00:05:52.720
growth, enormous innovation, great increase in productivity, and almost never patents

64
00:05:52.720 --> 00:06:02.120
are relevant, partly because the legal teams, so to speak, haven't got there yet, have

65
00:06:02.120 --> 00:06:08.680
not extended, there is not a custom of patenting thing, partly because it's not even convenient

66
00:06:08.680 --> 00:06:13.960
at the beginning, partly because of social norms, but it's not there.

67
00:06:13.960 --> 00:06:20.200
In fact, Bill Gates himself, when talking about the initial years of the modern software

68
00:06:20.200 --> 00:06:24.560
The software industry commented that we had patents back there in the 70s and 80s. The

69
00:06:24.560 --> 00:06:30.080
software industry would have not developed the way it does. It would have been much smaller,

70
00:06:30.080 --> 00:06:31.080
much lower growth.

71
00:06:31.080 --> 00:06:37.200
Just so that we're clear, you're not speaking of, for example, proprietary trade secrets

72
00:06:37.200 --> 00:06:39.960
that a firm is holding for itself, a formula?

73
00:06:39.960 --> 00:06:46.200
That's very different. The formula I have, I can decide to give it to you or not. I can

74
00:06:46.200 --> 00:07:16.200
I can sell it to you, I can license it to you under certain agreements, it's very different from, you know, it's like, what I know, if I know anything, but let's pretend that Miquel Bodri knows something, what I know, I can teach it to you or not, and we can agree on a fee for my service, that's nothing to do with intellectual, what's called intellectual property, we see what a patent does in particular, it prevents you from discovering the same thing. If you get there by yourself, or you get there by looking

75
00:07:16.200 --> 00:07:24.240
This is something which I feel very strongly. Imitation of best practices is possibly the

76
00:07:24.240 --> 00:07:30.160
greatest engine of economic growth, especially in less advanced countries. The patent prevents

77
00:07:30.160 --> 00:07:36.640
you from imitating me. Imagine sports with patents, as some crazy lawyers have been suggesting

78
00:07:36.640 --> 00:07:42.400
in this country. Imagine what football or basketball would become if we start patenting

79
00:07:42.400 --> 00:07:46.560
moves and schemes and tactics

80
00:07:46.560 --> 00:07:51.440
it would kill the fun you know the imitation the fact that I see that that

81
00:07:51.440 --> 00:07:55.600
guy does it right and he has a trick better than me and I put an effort into

82
00:07:55.600 --> 00:07:58.560
trying to do like him and maybe doing a little bit better

83
00:07:58.560 --> 00:08:01.440
that makes the competition thrive and the game interesting

84
00:08:01.440 --> 00:08:05.440
this was the point that shook me to my foundation

85
00:08:05.440 --> 00:08:08.800
this was the part I couldn't I had not grasped

86
00:08:08.800 --> 00:08:14.840
at all, before I read your book, was that, well, two things. One is that part of the

87
00:08:14.840 --> 00:08:19.200
very core of the growth of a free society and its development and its progress comes

88
00:08:19.200 --> 00:08:27.160
from imitation. And secondly, that the essence of copyright, the actual essence of monopoly

89
00:08:27.160 --> 00:08:30.640
is to make imitation, in effect, illegal.

90
00:08:30.640 --> 00:08:38.240
Right. Well, yes. Yes. That's, you know, economists like to talk about perfect market,

91
00:08:38.240 --> 00:08:52.240
and the lack of externalities and so on, right? They have all these big theories about public goods and we all dream up sometimes this abstract world in which there is no externality whatsoever and so perfect competition does the super-efficient thing.

92
00:08:52.240 --> 00:09:06.240
Obviously, that's an abstraction, right? And when you look at reality, you try to use that model, you do realize pretty soon that there is always some externality from human action, which is the fact that you and I can look at each other.

93
00:09:06.240 --> 00:09:09.600
Human beings are social and they live next to each other and they look at each other

94
00:09:09.600 --> 00:09:14.360
what they do, what they learn from each other and it's true, you know, do I charge you,

95
00:09:14.360 --> 00:09:22.280
do you charge me for showing me how to hold the fork or showing me how to cook the meat?

96
00:09:22.280 --> 00:09:23.280
No.

97
00:09:23.280 --> 00:09:27.040
And so in some sense you're underpaid.

98
00:09:27.040 --> 00:09:32.960
But you know, that's a line I don't want to start walking on.

99
00:09:32.960 --> 00:09:38.320
So it seems to me that imitation and the fact that we are social animals and we look at

100
00:09:38.320 --> 00:09:42.000
each other and compete with each other is a great engine of development when properly

101
00:09:42.000 --> 00:09:49.200
arranged and patents just prevent that, they put a huge lead on that, they say, nope, this

102
00:09:49.200 --> 00:09:55.740
cannot be done, for 20 years you cannot do it, and then sometimes, let me add one thing,

103
00:09:55.740 --> 00:10:02.740
We have this thing about James Watt in our book, in the first chapter, that we picked

104
00:10:02.740 --> 00:10:10.300
as poor James Watt, as the scoundrel of the story, as the symbol of a bad puppet. A bit

105
00:10:10.300 --> 00:10:15.300
we did it for a rhetorical purpose. Everybody has this mythological view of James Watt and

106
00:10:15.300 --> 00:10:20.420
we thought, well, he was a smart guy like many others, there's no reason to, so let's

107
00:10:20.420 --> 00:10:25.220
use the fact that everybody treated him as a superhero to capture attention. But there

108
00:10:25.220 --> 00:10:29.860
There was something more important apart from the rhetoric and the marketing that struck

109
00:10:29.860 --> 00:10:32.300
us in the story of Watt.

110
00:10:32.300 --> 00:10:36.180
What is it that Watt and his partner Bolton did?

111
00:10:36.180 --> 00:10:42.300
What contribution was it was, his team engine existed before him, in fact he got the idea

112
00:10:42.300 --> 00:10:45.860
by he was an engineer that would fix team engines and the most efficient team engine

113
00:10:45.860 --> 00:10:51.940
at the time was called New House I think, Newcom, Newcom, sorry, engine, okay.

114
00:10:51.940 --> 00:10:57.220
They were fine, they did the number three, but they had one thing that after what we

115
00:10:57.220 --> 00:10:58.480
realized is very useful.

116
00:10:58.480 --> 00:11:01.900
They did not have a separate condenser.

117
00:11:01.900 --> 00:11:07.060
There was a great idea that what had, he said, wait a second, this is very energy consuming

118
00:11:07.060 --> 00:11:12.060
because I have to let everything happens in just one container, I have to let the temperature

119
00:11:12.060 --> 00:11:20.460
go down, right, and all that energy gets wasted before I boil up the water again.

120
00:11:20.460 --> 00:11:28.020
But if after I have the piston lifted, I push the steam into a separate condenser, let the

121
00:11:28.020 --> 00:11:33.940
water condense there separately, that's a cold thing, and instead I inject fresh water

122
00:11:33.940 --> 00:11:38.580
in the original piston so that I can start the process of boiling it up quicker and faster

123
00:11:38.580 --> 00:11:41.140
and I save a lot of energy, right?

124
00:11:41.140 --> 00:11:44.220
Great idea, and deservedly did first and so on.

125
00:11:44.220 --> 00:11:45.220
But what happened?

126
00:11:45.220 --> 00:11:47.100
He patented that idea.

127
00:11:47.100 --> 00:11:54.640
If you think of it, it's impossible, even today, to make an engine that is a good engine

128
00:11:54.640 --> 00:11:56.880
that doesn't use that idea.

129
00:11:56.880 --> 00:12:01.640
The principle of having the condenser separate in a separate chamber is a great principle.

130
00:12:01.640 --> 00:12:05.560
So what happened during the 25 years of their patent?

131
00:12:05.560 --> 00:12:13.960
Other innovators came up with a lot of improvement, high pressure and a number of other things.

132
00:12:13.960 --> 00:12:19.040
So they contributed extra things to make the modern engine. But they all use also that

133
00:12:19.040 --> 00:12:27.120
idea. So that idea in some sense was a crucial ingredient of any future progress. Well, then

134
00:12:27.120 --> 00:12:32.000
for 25 years there was no progress, because you couldn't. Bolton and Walter had a patent

135
00:12:32.000 --> 00:12:39.480
on that specific idea. Nobody could do anything that used it. And that was the real block.

136
00:12:39.480 --> 00:12:57.480
In fact, that is something that is so much in the data, right, the economic historians have worked extensively on that, then you observe that the efficiency of steam engines in England did not grow at all between 1775 and 1800 when Bolton and Watt patent expired.

137
00:12:57.480 --> 00:13:06.480
There were only a lot of legal cases. Bolton and Watt would sue anybody that tried to make an engine different from there, better from there, and also had a separate condenser.

138
00:13:06.480 --> 00:13:10.480
Inventor. And they won. They were very good or they were very rich or they were very connected

139
00:13:10.480 --> 00:13:15.920
or whatever. They just kept winning. And then at a certain point people gave up. And suddenly

140
00:13:15.920 --> 00:13:22.440
then you look in a few years, in five years, after the patent expired, there is an explosion

141
00:13:22.440 --> 00:13:27.300
of new and much improved engine. It's literally, you know, other inventors have been sitting

142
00:13:27.300 --> 00:13:34.160
on potential innovations and waited until they could use it. And that's a perfect example

143
00:13:34.160 --> 00:14:02.160
Now, I suppose that, and I've heard this many times, I've gotten a lot of emails along these lines, people say, well, it's true that the patent will retard economic growth or the copyrights will limit distribution, but the initial invention might never have come about were it not for the prospect of gaining the monopoly. Do you see what I mean?

144
00:14:02.160 --> 00:14:10.280
I see what you mean and the only answer to that is obviously the honest answer is to

145
00:14:10.280 --> 00:14:15.860
say you might be right because there's no parallel universe in which we can redo human

146
00:14:15.860 --> 00:14:23.920
history and so on pure logic you cannot rule out that argument.

147
00:14:23.920 --> 00:14:28.860
All you can do is to use common sense and observation and recognize what?

148
00:14:28.860 --> 00:14:36.220
Every great innovation, pretty much every great innovation we have looked at was never

149
00:14:36.220 --> 00:14:42.300
the product of a single isolated guy that invented something completely unexpected.

150
00:14:42.300 --> 00:14:47.140
But there were always three, four, seven, twelve people working on roughly the same

151
00:14:47.140 --> 00:14:51.860
project and somebody got there a little bit first.

152
00:14:51.860 --> 00:14:55.740
And in fact most innovation were the cumulative type.

153
00:14:55.740 --> 00:15:01.980
They built up, they gave a small contribution one over the other and there is a degree of

154
00:15:01.980 --> 00:15:06.980
randomness in fact on who got the first patent for the thing.

155
00:15:06.980 --> 00:15:11.340
So common sense and historical observation suggest that that hypothesis is theoretically

156
00:15:11.340 --> 00:15:18.500
possible but highly unlikely, highly unlikely because most of the time lots of people were

157
00:15:18.500 --> 00:15:19.500
competing.

158
00:15:19.500 --> 00:15:23.980
And then there is another thing and this we can do especially with modern data and modern

159
00:15:23.980 --> 00:15:25.260
statistics.

160
00:15:25.260 --> 00:15:33.420
We can ask, okay, how much money, how much extra money would the typical innovator really

161
00:15:33.420 --> 00:15:40.620
need to receive to motivate them to do the innovative activity?

162
00:15:40.620 --> 00:15:43.220
Because that's the question you want to ask.

163
00:15:43.220 --> 00:15:46.700
Do they really need the big monopoly profits that some of them do?

164
00:15:46.700 --> 00:15:53.220
Do you think Bill Gates and his group would have not worked on MS-DOS and software if

165
00:15:53.220 --> 00:16:00.820
If they had somehow knew back then, then instead of making the multi-billion they made, they

166
00:16:00.820 --> 00:16:03.820
would have only made multi-millions.

167
00:16:03.820 --> 00:16:04.820
I doubt it.

168
00:16:04.820 --> 00:16:13.860
An example I like to use is most big movie and music experts that have become insanely

169
00:16:13.860 --> 00:16:16.500
rich thanks to copyright.

170
00:16:16.500 --> 00:16:20.660
And you look at the career of these people and you look at what they were doing before

171
00:16:20.660 --> 00:16:24.260
And you say, okay, assume Madonna, instead of making hundreds of millions she made in

172
00:16:24.260 --> 00:16:30.700
her life, because of lack of copyright, because of very short copyright on her music, ended

173
00:16:30.700 --> 00:16:35.460
up earning an average of, say, $3 million a year, as opposed to the 30 or 40 or whatever

174
00:16:35.460 --> 00:16:38.580
she earns, okay, or $2 million a year.

175
00:16:38.580 --> 00:16:42.660
Would she have opted for whatever her career was before they're in New Jersey serving

176
00:16:42.660 --> 00:16:43.660
at a bar?

177
00:16:43.660 --> 00:16:46.660
I somehow doubt it, you know?

178
00:16:46.660 --> 00:16:52.900
Yes, and another point that you go into extensively in the book is the enormous advantage that

179
00:16:52.900 --> 00:16:58.940
accrues to the first market player who comes to dominate the field in a new technology,

180
00:16:58.940 --> 00:17:06.760
in a new software, in a book, a publishing or something along those lines.

181
00:17:06.760 --> 00:17:14.780
The advantages for being the first past the post are huge and they last and they last,

182
00:17:14.780 --> 00:17:15.780
don't they?

183
00:17:15.780 --> 00:17:30.780
Right. That's the other thing that people don't notice. It's not very easy, exactly because imitation is very valuable. It's also true that it's not really the most automatic thing, the easiest thing to do.

184
00:17:30.780 --> 00:17:43.780
When somebody is really better and knows how to do something quite a bit better than the other, the advantage lasts for a long time. And that gives you great rents, that gives you great profit.

185
00:17:43.780 --> 00:17:49.540
My preferred example is, but there are many, we can go on the whole hour, but the best

186
00:17:49.540 --> 00:17:50.540
one is aspirin.

187
00:17:50.540 --> 00:17:51.540
You understand?

188
00:17:51.540 --> 00:17:57.420
Aspirin was not patented, aspirin, that's what we're supposed to be calling it, in Germany

189
00:17:57.420 --> 00:18:04.220
where it was first figured out, they had at the time, quite wisely, in the pharmaceutical

190
00:18:04.220 --> 00:18:09.620
and for a long time, in fact, the German chemical and pharmaceutical industry is one of our

191
00:18:09.620 --> 00:18:17.860
most preferred example because it came to dominate the world in chemistry without patent.

192
00:18:17.860 --> 00:18:22.340
German law allowed only patenting processes, not product.

193
00:18:22.340 --> 00:18:26.180
The argument was actually philosophically very interesting from a libertarian point

194
00:18:26.180 --> 00:18:27.180
of view.

195
00:18:27.180 --> 00:18:30.700
You may or may not agree with the argument, but it's interesting.

196
00:18:30.700 --> 00:18:38.840
It says chemical compounds that are feasible and possible are unique and are given in nature.

197
00:18:38.840 --> 00:18:44.000
Some people would appeal to nature, others would call God into the picture, but it doesn't

198
00:18:44.000 --> 00:18:50.000
matter. They are there and they exist as possible. They are not an invention of human mind. The

199
00:18:50.000 --> 00:18:53.840
fact that you can make the aspen is because chemically this is possible. So that thing

200
00:18:53.840 --> 00:18:58.720
cannot be patented because it cannot be an exclusive property of anybody. It's a chemical

201
00:18:58.720 --> 00:19:03.080
compound that can be made in nature and anybody should have the right to do it. On the other

202
00:19:03.080 --> 00:19:08.880
and the processes, the technological processes through which we get from the separate component

203
00:19:08.880 --> 00:19:14.080
to the compound. Those are very diverse. We can get to the same compound in very different

204
00:19:14.080 --> 00:19:19.440
ways and so it's legitimate that people patent it. So they allow process patenting and not

205
00:19:19.440 --> 00:19:27.560
product patenting. So they are asking per se could not be patented. Nevertheless, it

206
00:19:27.560 --> 00:19:33.640
at the enormous success it had. But, it is interesting, how many decades did it take,

207
00:19:33.640 --> 00:19:40.500
in fact, to find something as good as aspirin for its users? Very many. It was a dramatic

208
00:19:40.500 --> 00:19:44.280
example of, you know, initial advantage that lasts for a long time.

209
00:19:44.280 --> 00:19:50.200
Well, sure, sure, sure, sure. And, I mean, as you say, we could go on an hour. I do this

210
00:19:50.200 --> 00:19:57.280
all the time. I will continue to buy very expensive name brand software. I don't even

211
00:19:57.280 --> 00:20:02.160
Sometimes because it's better, it's more reliable.

212
00:20:02.160 --> 00:20:05.720
You think all these things and then when you finally take the risk and buy the thing that

213
00:20:05.720 --> 00:20:12.920
costs one-tenth as much, you discover that maybe it's better and it costs a fraction

214
00:20:12.920 --> 00:20:17.440
of the price and the support is there and it even has some advantages, but it takes

215
00:20:17.440 --> 00:20:22.760
you a long time to finally jump in and they continue to not be market leaders although

216
00:20:22.760 --> 00:20:27.440
So they make money in a niche market, but it's extraordinary.

217
00:20:27.440 --> 00:20:31.520
And you give the examples of even such things as what's that luggage company you talk about?

218
00:20:31.520 --> 00:20:32.520
Oh, right.

219
00:20:32.520 --> 00:20:33.520
Yeah, yeah.

220
00:20:33.520 --> 00:20:37.000
That was another beautiful example, right?

221
00:20:37.000 --> 00:20:38.000
Can you turn off?

222
00:20:38.000 --> 00:20:40.000
I need to say I had a visitor here.

223
00:20:40.000 --> 00:20:42.000
Can you stop the recording for a second?

224
00:20:42.000 --> 00:20:43.000
Yes, yes.

225
00:20:43.000 --> 00:20:44.000
We're not live, right?

226
00:20:44.000 --> 00:20:45.000
Yes, right.

227
00:20:45.000 --> 00:20:46.000
Sorry.

228
00:20:46.000 --> 00:20:47.000
That's okay.

229
00:20:47.000 --> 00:20:48.000
Go ahead.

230
00:20:48.000 --> 00:20:49.000
Yeah, the luggage.

231
00:20:49.000 --> 00:20:50.000
Yeah, yeah.

232
00:20:50.000 --> 00:20:51.000
The travel profit.

233
00:20:51.000 --> 00:20:52.000
That's fantastic.

234
00:20:52.000 --> 00:21:22.000
In the classical case, imitation is easy in some sense. There's another comment that this brings about, which is a general rule, and so these guys were the first, and the idea was a simple idea, why not putting some wheels on the thing, and they went first, but they were quickly imitated, and nevertheless, they thrive, they're still there, they're still one of the largest producer of carry-ons, and so on and so forth.

235
00:21:22.000 --> 00:21:27.080
What is, for example, the general thing you learn from that example, that often there

236
00:21:27.080 --> 00:21:34.960
is a strong correlation between how easy it is to imitate an innovation and how cheap

237
00:21:34.960 --> 00:21:37.200
it is.

238
00:21:37.200 --> 00:21:42.280
So the argument that says, oh my God, the entrepreneur that innovates first has to spend

239
00:21:42.280 --> 00:21:48.280
enormous resources, great effort, great risk in coming up with a new thing, and then he's

240
00:21:48.280 --> 00:21:53.960
and Donald E stuff has come up with a great idea and you just look at him or her and copy

241
00:21:53.960 --> 00:21:55.400
in a super cheap way.

242
00:21:55.400 --> 00:22:02.560
That's a good story for late night chit chatting when we're drunk, but it's not really reality

243
00:22:02.560 --> 00:22:07.140
because in reality what happens is that it's easy to imitate only if the innovation is

244
00:22:07.140 --> 00:22:12.580
easy to come across, if it is not very expensive, if it is not a lot of fixed cost in it.

245
00:22:12.580 --> 00:22:17.040
When it's a very complicated thing that requires millions of dollars and hours and hours and

246
00:22:17.040 --> 00:22:23.640
team, then imitating it requires exactly the same kind of effort. You don't imitate production

247
00:22:23.640 --> 00:22:29.840
processes for nuclear plants just by looking at them. They're very delicate. You don't

248
00:22:29.840 --> 00:22:36.720
imitate the Tiptron automatic shift mechanism of some cars just by looking at it. You need

249
00:22:36.720 --> 00:22:42.520
your big engine, you need a lot of trial, even if you do. Another example which is dramatically

250
00:22:42.520 --> 00:22:57.120
How many Japanese-made or German-made cars have we had available in the last 40 years

251
00:22:57.120 --> 00:22:59.320
to reverse engineer and imitate?

252
00:22:59.320 --> 00:23:06.920
How many Toyota factories or Mercedes factories could we imitate and look at what they do

253
00:23:06.920 --> 00:23:07.920
and do the same?

254
00:23:07.920 --> 00:23:10.920
And guess what?

255
00:23:10.920 --> 00:23:15.620
We never quite managed to be, we, I mean the big three, never quite managed to make it

256
00:23:15.620 --> 00:23:21.040
that good. So, when the stuff is delicate and expensive, it's actually very difficult

257
00:23:21.040 --> 00:23:22.040
to imitate.

258
00:23:22.040 --> 00:23:26.960
And even when it's all digital, I recall when Amazon first opened its doors, somebody said,

259
00:23:26.960 --> 00:23:31.600
oh, well, they'll never make any money because we live in a world in which anybody can open

260
00:23:31.600 --> 00:23:33.640
an Amazon store.

261
00:23:33.640 --> 00:23:35.800
Anybody can be Amazon. Well, somehow that didn't happen.

262
00:23:35.800 --> 00:23:39.640
Right. And not for lack of trying, right? How many imitators were there.

263
00:23:39.640 --> 00:23:51.140
Yeah, not for lack of time. Now, your conclusions in the book, and I hope that we can do some more interviews this time. If you enjoyed this, I'd like to do this a few more times.

264
00:23:51.140 --> 00:23:55.140
It was nice to chat with you. You know a lot more than me, probably.

265
00:23:55.140 --> 00:24:06.140
No, you're my teacher, and I hope that you can teach the whole world, because your thesis is radical, it's far-reaching, it goes way beyond just the issue of patents and copyrights.

266
00:24:06.140 --> 00:24:11.820
because I think what you've really done is made a massive contribution to liberal

267
00:24:11.820 --> 00:24:17.700
theory in general and a new way to understand the way society progresses

268
00:24:17.700 --> 00:24:22.140
and this this was the feature that I still can't quite get over.

269
00:24:22.140 --> 00:24:26.700
Let me, I want to be humble, I'm not your humble, if you know me you actually know

270
00:24:26.700 --> 00:24:30.620
that people think I'm more arrogant than I should but so for once let me try to

271
00:24:30.620 --> 00:24:39.020
I tell you what, this is very, very honest, and I don't know if David and I ever made

272
00:24:39.020 --> 00:24:44.620
this public, but this is actually complete truth.

273
00:24:44.620 --> 00:24:50.300
We got to this point of view, and we got to write our papers and our books, essentially

274
00:24:50.300 --> 00:24:52.060
out of surprise.

275
00:24:52.060 --> 00:24:58.460
I was a student in Rochester, New York, where I got my PhD, of a distinguished scholar in

276
00:24:58.460 --> 00:25:04.220
and also Paul Romer was one of my teachers. I learned a lot from Paul Romer. Now Paul

277
00:25:04.220 --> 00:25:09.100
Romer is famous for being one of the initiators, some people would say the initiator, but there

278
00:25:09.100 --> 00:25:13.260
are a bunch of others, but certainly one of the people that contributed more to what's

279
00:25:13.260 --> 00:25:17.820
called New Growth Theory, which is essentially the opposite of what we claim. New Growth

280
00:25:17.820 --> 00:25:23.260
Theory says growth is driven by innovation, innovation driven by increasing return and

281
00:25:23.260 --> 00:25:30.620
and Monopoly Power. So in order to understand the process of growth, we have to focus on

282
00:25:30.620 --> 00:25:36.220
increasing returns and so on. And the thing never quite convinced me for the reason, in

283
00:25:36.220 --> 00:25:41.940
fact, that then we made clear. And I argued often with Paul. One of my examples was he

284
00:25:41.940 --> 00:25:47.580
always had this example that he used. He said, you know, technology is new ideas like recipes.

285
00:25:47.580 --> 00:25:51.740
And so once you have the recipes, everybody can use it. It's like a free good. Economists

286
00:25:51.740 --> 00:25:55.500
have this expression, it's a public good, everybody can access it.

287
00:25:55.500 --> 00:25:59.700
And because it becomes a public good and everybody can access it, then the innovator would have

288
00:25:59.700 --> 00:26:04.020
no incentive to produce it, if that were the case, right?

289
00:26:04.020 --> 00:26:06.180
Because once you have the recipes, you know everything.

290
00:26:06.180 --> 00:26:12.260
And I remember challenging him, me being Italian, he actually had a passion, him and his wife,

291
00:26:12.260 --> 00:26:16.660
for cooking, and a lot of them used to talk to me about, you know, cooking book and so

292
00:26:16.660 --> 00:26:17.660
on.

293
00:26:17.660 --> 00:26:23.420
Paul, if you and I cook a risotto, do you think it's going to come out of the same

294
00:26:23.420 --> 00:26:24.420
quality?

295
00:26:24.420 --> 00:26:31.300
No, obviously you have an advantage, but the recipe of risotto has been around for decades.

296
00:26:31.300 --> 00:26:37.640
You own dozens of books, so anyhow, I was never convinced.

297
00:26:37.640 --> 00:26:42.760
When I got to work, at some point I moved from Chicago to UCLA to follow my beloved

298
00:26:42.760 --> 00:26:47.120
wife and I got acquainted and met David, we became friends.

299
00:26:47.120 --> 00:26:52.240
This was in 1987. For years we talked about new growth theory and about the stuff that

300
00:26:52.240 --> 00:26:55.680
then we wrote and we were always agreeing on everything. But it was all verbal. I like

301
00:26:55.680 --> 00:27:00.160
to talk a lot, so does David. We like discussions. So we would discuss and have a brighter paper.

302
00:27:00.160 --> 00:27:04.840
So these guys are all wrong. Somebody should explain them. But to us, it seemed that it

303
00:27:04.840 --> 00:27:12.720
was plain old economic theory that made that very clear. Marshall, you know, the old Schumpeter,

304
00:27:12.720 --> 00:27:42.720
The Theory of Money and Credit The Theory of Money and Credit

305
00:27:42.720 --> 00:27:54.480
And we agree at this point on every little detail we have come up with dozens of examples.

306
00:27:54.480 --> 00:27:55.480
So it is a deal.

307
00:27:55.480 --> 00:28:00.560
Either we stop, because I'm getting bored, and we start arguing about something else

308
00:28:00.560 --> 00:28:04.280
where we disagree, or we write a paper.

309
00:28:04.280 --> 00:28:07.720
Because even if it seems obvious to us that we're not contributing anything, that this

310
00:28:07.720 --> 00:28:11.280
is all there in the classics, clearly this is not the case out there.

311
00:28:11.280 --> 00:28:13.760
Let's try to explain to people the classics.

312
00:28:13.760 --> 00:28:15.200
And frankly, we started writing from this.

313
00:28:15.200 --> 00:28:18.640
So I was extremely surprised when we wrote the first couple of papers.

314
00:28:18.640 --> 00:28:21.680
The people would look at us like we were from Mars.

315
00:28:21.680 --> 00:28:24.960
Because I kept saying, guys, this is Marshal.

316
00:28:24.960 --> 00:28:27.000
You know, this was written in the 19th century.

317
00:28:27.000 --> 00:28:29.280
We're just putting in modern words and formulas.

318
00:28:29.280 --> 00:28:34.400
But so, yeah, I mean, I'm glad that you see this as a great contribution.

319
00:28:34.400 --> 00:28:39.200
But I honestly, I purely think that all we're doing is to bring some classical thinking into.

320
00:28:39.200 --> 00:28:40.400
I know this is what you think.

321
00:28:40.400 --> 00:28:52.400
And in some ways, it's brilliant in the way that many great insights in the history of ideas are brilliant, because they're, at their core, simple.

322
00:28:52.400 --> 00:28:56.400
It's just a new application that nobody had really seen before.

323
00:28:56.400 --> 00:29:00.400
Yeah, maybe it's an application. Yeah, I agree.

324
00:29:00.400 --> 00:29:12.400
This dimension of the way a free society works has eluded, I think, many thinkers. I think Bastiat had it, more or less.

325
00:29:12.400 --> 00:29:17.400
But the application is particularly relevant to everything that everybody's thinking about right now.

326
00:29:17.400 --> 00:29:23.400
So it provides an opportunity for people to come to not just a new understanding of intellectual property,

327
00:29:23.400 --> 00:29:34.400
New understanding of the way civilization progresses or regresses. This is, I think, a great surprise to me from your book.

328
00:29:34.400 --> 00:29:42.400
Yes, yes. In fact, I honestly think I wish I was younger and more energetic and I had more some sense of usability,

329
00:29:42.400 --> 00:29:52.400
because one thing that we think is very important is the implication of what we've been writing and thinking and arguing for developing countries.

330
00:29:52.400 --> 00:29:57.680
If you want to understand the process of development, you want to understand how Mexico and Colombia

331
00:29:57.680 --> 00:30:04.920
and China and NUNA and India can become rich and so on, you have to look at the thing we're

332
00:30:04.920 --> 00:30:08.840
talking about, catching up amounts to imitating.

333
00:30:08.840 --> 00:30:09.840
That's it.

334
00:30:09.840 --> 00:30:10.840
You understand?

335
00:30:10.840 --> 00:30:20.160
India is not going to become developed and rich and those 1.2, 1.3 billion people are

336
00:30:20.160 --> 00:30:23.880
They're not going to increase their income per capita by becoming all softer engineer

337
00:30:23.880 --> 00:30:30.440
overnight or discovering new drugs, they're going to become rich by starting to produce

338
00:30:30.440 --> 00:30:37.400
the same things we produce with the same technologies and maybe doing a little bit better.

339
00:30:37.400 --> 00:30:39.600
No imitation, no development.

340
00:30:39.600 --> 00:30:43.400
Just look at every period in history, you catch up by doing that.

341
00:30:43.400 --> 00:30:49.360
United States became great economy by initially imitating and adopting and people these days

342
00:30:49.360 --> 00:31:04.360
I would say pirating. European technologies. And eventually they caught up and surpassed, but for a long time it was pirating left and right.

343
00:31:04.360 --> 00:31:12.360
Michele Boldrain, I will thank you for your wonderful discussion today and can we meet up again?

344
00:31:12.360 --> 00:31:15.360
Jeff, I'm very happy to talk to you.

345
00:31:15.360 --> 00:31:17.360
Thank you very much.

346
00:31:17.360 --> 00:31:19.360
Thanks. Bye-bye.