I've always had a major problem with Intellectual Property, as a concept. But in a world full of people who not only accept IP laws, but argue that they are necessary for functioning society, I've always felt my opinion needed a great deal of fleshing out before I was willing to engage other people in discussion about it. Having such a small minority opinion means I better have thought it all the way through.

It's often been hard for me to put into words what my objection is. I often tell people that property must physically exist to be called "property" and inventing a contradictory term like "intellectual property" in order to call copying something "theft" is like calling premarital sex "consensual rape" in order to call it illegal. Beyond that, and occasionally singing the words to "Copying is Not Theft", I've often been at a loss for expressing my view, which I felt very alone in having.

Finding this book (pamphlet really) was like a heavenly light shining through the clouds. It perfectly puts my views on Intellectual Property, and its inherently contradictory nature, into words. I finally have a bunch of good analogies for explaining my views, and I no longer feel like a complete loner in my view.

To make things better, it turns out that Kinsella's view of IP is not only compatible with, but naturally flows from libertarianism. As a (lower-case l) libertarian, I was happy to discover that two viewpoints that I hold, which seemed related, actually are very closely related.

All in all, the book is clear, short, and makes a solid argument against Intellectual Property. It includes summaries of arguments in favor of IP, then dismantles them quickly. If I could make everyone in the world read one book, I'd probably make them read this one.