"Intellectual property" - patents and copyrights - have become controversial. We witness teenagers being sued for "pirating" music - and we observe AIDS patients in Africa dying due to lack of ability to pay for drugs that are high priced to satisfy patent holders. Are patents and copyrights essential to thriving creation and innovation - do we need them so that we all may enjoy fine music and good health? Across time and space the resounding answer is: No. So-called intellectual property is in fact an "intellectual monopoly" that hinders rather than helps the competitive free market regime that has delivered wealth and innovation to our doorsteps. This book has broad coverage of both copyrights and patents and is designed for a general audience, focusing on simple examples. The authors conclude that the only sensible policy to follow is to eliminate the patents and copyright systems as they currently exist.

Leading economists revisit a provocative essay by John Maynard Keynes, debating Keynes's vision of growth, inequality, work, leisure, entrepreneurship, consumerism, and the search for happiness in the twenty-first century.

Los autores de la obra, dos economistas de primera fila, ofrecen en su página web - y además gratuitamente, lo que muestra la coherencia con sus ideas- una nueva versión del libro, en el que abogan, por razones de eficiencia económica, por la completa y total abolición de los derechos de propiedad intelectual e industrial, salvo el de marca y otros de carácter identificativo de bienes y servicios. Como ellos mismos dicen, intentan demostrar mediante teoría y ejemplos que el monopolio intelectual no es necesario para la innovación y que lo único que está haciendo es dificultar el crecimiento, la prosperidad y la libertad.

"The data show that an increase in government provided old-age pensions is strongly correlated with a reduction in fertility. What type of model is consistent with this finding? We explore this question using two models of fertility: one by Barro and Becker (1989), and one inspired by Caldwell (1978, 1982) and developed by Boldrin and Jones (2002).In Barro and Becker's model parents have children because they perceive their children's lives as a continuation of their own.In Boldrin and Jones' framework parents procreate because children care about their parents' utility, and thus provide them with old-age transfers.The effect of increases in government provided pensions on fertility in the Barro and Becker model is very small, whereas the effect on fertility in the Boldrin and Jones model is sizeable and accounts for between 55 and 65% of the observed Europe-U.S.fertility differences both across countries and across time"--Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis web site.