Promoting freedom, innovation, and growth

Connect with IPI

Receive news, research, and updates

RSS Feed

Early Voting Boom Amid Denton Fracking Fight

Posted by Erin Humiston | Comments | October 28, 2014

Legal, Economic & Property Rights Arguments Against the Proposed Ban on Fracking in Denton (video)

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | October 23, 2014

More Misleading Hype about the IP Chapter of the TPP: Forbes' Katheryn Thayer

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | October 23, 2014

I’m cataloging some of the misleading, distorting, uninformed and just plain awful reactions to the latest Wikileaked IP chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership treaty in a series of blog posts, in order to keep my response down to manageably sized bites.

My general reaction to this pattern of distortion can be found in my response to the previously leaked chapter, here. Frankly, not much has substantively changed since then, except for the ever greater heights of distortion from the IP skeptic crowd.

Perhaps the worst reaction was from Katheryn Thayer at Forbes, and I want to stress that Katheryn identifies herself as “staff” at Forbes, and not just as one of their many authorized bloggers. Katheryn uncritically accepts and then further inflates the inaccurate and policy-sloppy arguments of the IP skeptic activist groups, and her article is much more of an opinion piece. Most problematic, she works from the assumption that the TPP is “the latest threat to digital innovation and free speech online.” That’s just totally unjustified. You don’t get to throw around a charge of threatening free speech without backing it up. But she doesn't. Read More >>

Ending Sugar Subsidies the Right (the Only?) Way

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | October 14, 2014

Because of our interest in trade policy and general opposition to government subsidies and other interference in private markets, we’ve done a few pieces on the issue of sugar subsidies, and lately about the best way to phase them out.

About this time last year we released “Solving the Sugar Subsidy Problem,” which outlined the basics of the issue and suggested that the solution must be some sort of global trade pact, most likely through a World Trade Organization (WTO) process.

And this past May we released “Seeking a Global Solution in Sugar Trade Policy,” which explained some of the enormous sugar subsidies and other trade distortions common to trading partners like Brazil, India, Mexico and Thailand. In the face of such global subsidies, only a global solution is probably workable.

Otherwise, you simply allow subsidized foreign competition to destroy our domestic sugar industry, after which time you could expect foreign suppliers to ratchet back up the price, as we explained.

Last week, Americans for Limited Government released a new paper reviewing the material on foreign sugar subsidies by those same four major producers (India, Thailand, Mexico and Brazil), and essentially pleading for free-traders and free-market promoters to embrace the global agreement model, as outlined by Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL).

Essentially, the Yoho “zero-for-zero” proposal is a commitment by the U.S. that we would eliminate all our sugar subsidy programs if our trading partners would agree to come to a similar agreement. The Yoho plan would require some sort of trade agreement, either a bilateral or multilateral “Sugar FTA” or a WTO agreement. But, under Yoho’s plan, the U.S. takes the first step by making the commitment.

The alternatives are to either leave in place the status quo, which free-marketers and free-traders oppose, or unilateral disarmament, which free-marketers and free-traders (I argue) SHOULD oppose. Read More >>

Giovanetti Talks Denton Drilling Ban on The Blaze

Posted by Erin Humiston | Comments | October 6, 2014

Good Riddance, FCC Blackout Rules

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | September 30, 2014

This morning the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to eliminate its sports blackout rule, which helped the NFL justify blacking out the broadcast of NFL games that were not sold out.

The blackout rule was always a case of the FCC getting government involved in the business model of a company/league, which is always a mistake. Policy and business models should never be confused. Government sets policy, and then people go out and create business models. Government should not be creating or distorting or assisting anyone's business model. Read More >>

Grooveshark Found Guilty of Massive Copyright Infringement

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | September 29, 2014

This evening Grooveshark, the popular music streaming service that has up to now managed to skirt accusations by copyright holders that is was hosting music files without paying appropriate royalties, was found to be guilty of massive copyright piracy.

Grooveshark’s defense has long been that it is legal under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the federal law that protects websites that host third-party material if they comply with takedown notices from copyright holders. Read More >>

IPI Meets with State Department Delegates from India

Posted by Merrill Matthews | Comments | September 25, 2014

Occasionally IPI president Tom Giovanetti and I get the opportunity to speak with scholars, journalists and government officials from other countries who are in the U.S. as part of a State Department outreach program. I recently spent time with this group from India, discussing the role think tanks play in developing government policies, especially foreign policy. Read More >>

Online Piracy Is not Due to a Lack of Available Content

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | September 25, 2014

I've always thought it was somewhat self-incriminating that critics of copyright tend to excuse copyright piracy. They usually claim to believe in some form of copyright (though they can almost never describe what they would support), and claim to believe in obeying the law, yet they excuse and explain away piracy.

Very often, the technique is to deflect "but don't you think piracy is wrong?" with a quick "yeah, but Hollywood . . . " and then you either get:

  • Hollywood doesn't make content available to consumers they way they want it (what they really mean is that Hollywood should make its products available to consumers immediately, easily, in a variety of formats, and for almost nothing).
  • All those rich Hollywood fatcats make too much money. I'm just depriving them of their next Bentley
  • Hollywood is defending their old business model instead of adapting to changing technology
  • Copyright term is too long (what this has to do with pirating a movie that's been out for a week is not obvious to me)

or some other foolishness.

Yes, Of Course, In Trade Agreements, the Devil Is In the Details

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | September 23, 2014

Simon Lester, who I met earlier this year speaking at a Cato event, has a blog up over at Cato at Liberty giving a somewhat nuanced response to my new IPI Ideas on including IP protection in trade agreements.

His point, essentially, is that I'm being very general rather than granular in my argument. And he's completely right, of course. My argument in the piece IS a general argument; namely, that it's appropriate and important to include IP in trade agreements.

And, in fact, my general argument in favor is a response to the general argument that is being made by many, including Cato personnel, that IP should NOT be included in trade agreements. Read More >>

U.S. Petroleum Exports Up, Crude Oil Imports Down

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | September 19, 2014

We've spoken several times about how the United States has the potential to become energy self-sufficient through the shale revolution. Indeed, the U.S. could become the world's #1 exporter of energy, if the right policies are put into place.

As evidence that this is beginning to happen, Bloomberg reports that, in August, U.S. exports of petroleum hit record highs, and imports of crude oil hit record lows.

U.S. exports of petroleum products reached a record in August for the month as refiners boosted rates, the American Petroleum Institute said. Read More >>

Some Things Are Worth Requiring Permission

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | September 17, 2014

Wednesday the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet will hold a hearing on the portion of the Digital Millennium Copyright ACT (DMCA) that makes legally possible and enforceable strong digital rights management (DRM) and other forms of technical protection measures (TPMs). Section 1201 of the DMCA makes it illegal to circumvent such technical protection measures, and was designed in part to implement the WIPO Internet treaties.

Section 1201 has been the subject of much ire from both technologists (who didn’t see the point and who like things simple) and from the IP skeptic community (who don’t like IP and certainly don’t like anything that reinforces IP). TPMs are occasionally inconvenient, but the track record of TPMs has been one of facilitating numerous new business models for the distribution of music, video and software. Today’s content-rich environment is due largely in part to the fact that content owners have sufficient confidence that they can make their content available through reasonably secure channels, and those channels are made reasonably secure through TPMs. Read More >>

We're Flaring (Wasting) Shale Gas Because We Can't Export It

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | September 16, 2014

I have one of those "Earth at Night" maps from National Geographic on a wall in IPI's offices. Among the things it shows is places in Russia, the Middle East and East Africa that seem to be on fire. That's flaring--the burning off of gas or oil because for one reason or another it isn't being captured and refined.

Most of the time this is because of inefficient operations, lack of pipelines, etc. But according to a piece a few days ago in the San Antonio Express-News, there's quite a bit of flaring going on in U.S. shale formations like the Eagle Ford.

The article is reasonably fair and balanced, but, as Jon Cassidy at points out, the main reason for flaring in the U.S. is the federal export ban on oil & natural gas.

There is one key fact, however, that went missing from the series, which explains a lot of what’s going on. If the reporters knew of it, they may have just decided it was beyond the scope of their story. It’s this: low natural gas prices are not some inalterable fact of the free market. They are largely the result of a federal ban on natural gas exports that dates back to the Arab Oil Embargo. Read More >>

U.S. Energy Boom not about to Run Out

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | September 16, 2014

According to a piece in the Wall Street Journal, the U.S. energy boom is not about to run out:

The number of rigs drilling in the U.S. is basically flat, but production is rising. The federal Energy Information Administration calls this "drilling productivity" and says it is showing no sign of slowing.

Lynn Westfall, the EIA's director of energy markets and financial analysis, points out that the rig count in South Texas' Eagle Ford Shale "has not changed since 2012, but the production per new well has doubled."

Innovation makes the difference. The federal government recently predicted that oil production would rise through 2019 and then flatten off. But a second scenario in the report assumed that extraction technology would continue to improve, leading crude output to rise through 2040, if not longer. Read More >>

U.S. Shale Boom Is Saving the World $5 Billion a Day

Posted by Tom Giovanetti | Comments | September 16, 2014

Interesting piece in Quartz about how the U.S. shale revolution has dramatically stabilized world oil and gas prices, saving the world almost $5 billion every day:

Oil prices continue to plunge today despite the beheading of another western hostage by the Islamic State, tensions between Russia and the West, and mayhem in Libya. As Quartz has reported, one of the main reasons is surging US oil production, which has made up for supply disruption almost barrel for barrel—and is also a bad sign for the leaders of petrostates.

Now we have an estimate of where oil prices might have been absent the American oil boom—a sobering $150 a barrel, former BP CEO Tony Hayward told the Financial Times (paywall).

That’s 55% higher than the current benchmark price of $96.27 that was trading in Asia this morning. If Hayward’s number is right, it means that the US boom is saving the global economy about $4.9 billion a day in oil spending. Global consumers currently demand about 92 million barrels of oil a day, and without the extra US supply the market would be about 3 million barrels short, sufficient to send traders into a frenzy bidding up the price.

Since 2011, US oil production has soared by about 3 million barrels a day, to about 8.5 million barrels, thanks mostly to the technique of hydraulic fracturing in shale oil fields. That is just a bit less than the volume of oil production that has been persistently off line since the 2011 Arab Spring ushered in the three-year wave of unusual oil disruptions the world has experienced. When you add in a 1-million-barrel-a-day rise in Canadian oil production in the same time period, North America as a region has swamped the lost barrels.


Total Records: 508


IP Matters



  • TaxBytes-New

Copyright Institute for Policy Innovation 2018. All Rights Reserved Privacy Policy Contact IPI.

e-resources e-resources