I saw that, too, and to me it's a major if not show-stopping problem, kind of like trying to come up with the Unified Field Theory without first understanding quantum mechanics. Economics is the indispensable key to understanding human behavior.

I wonder (but not putting words in your mouth) if you confuse capitalism with anarchism. Of course, any moral defense of capitalism starts with the protection of all property rights, which de facto means some form of government

Patents and Copyrights are property rights, they are not regulations.

What do you mean by market forces don't always work? By what standard?

How I miss her writing. There will not be another like her.
DB much thanks for presenting this, I am going to send it to friends.
Is there any information as to what he might have answered her?

Ayn Rand's view of reality is closely related to what is known as "Classical Physics". The classical physics view includes Newtonian and Einsteinian mechanics and as such is deterministic and predictable. The predictability aspect is best illustrated by fact that the locations of the planets at any point in time in the past or future may be calculated to an arbitrary degree of precision. It is from this that the concept of a "Clockwork Universe" arose. Classical physics assumes that the universe is, at least in principal, completely knowable. There is no "hidden" or inaccessible knowledge". However, with the advent of quantum physics and the newer chaos physics we realize that while classical physics is not in the strictest sense wrong it is incomplete. The real world is much more complex and bizarre than the classical physics model would suggest. There are conditions where cause and effect become blurred and time runs backward and even sideways (what ever that means). Classical physics works most of the time but there are observable conditions where it does not. "There are things in Heaven and Earth that are not dreampt of..."

I can accept that you have a different view, but I still say you havent answered my argument. The word patent troll is commonly used to indicate persons or companies that simply file patents for the purpose of exercising government granted monopoly power over true inventors who intend to commercialize their inventions. The patent trolls do not actually make anything or commercialize their inventions, but seek to profit from the work of those who do courtesy of government monopoly powers.

And you point is what? That the market cannot do that and it needs to be regulated?

The very fact that you use the word patent troll shows you are either ignorant or just pushing propaganda. Based on your history I would choose PROPAGANDIST

I did challenge you to answer my argument. I take it that your answer is that I am ignorant. I dont think thats a very rational answer. Perhaps some changes in the patent system will answer my objection. In the meantime, I dont think it helps inventors as you claim it does.

You ignorance know no bounds and you refuse to be learn and you ignore all evidence. WOW you make a perfect Austrian.

I do not think Rand said business people are infallible. Where did you get that idea?

I challenge the proponents of the current monopoly-granting patent system to justify how it is fair to prevent a completely independent inventor from making something that HE (she) thought of just because someone else might have thought of it first.

I say that the patent system actually impedes innovation, in that an inventor now has to find out if the government will permit him to actually sell his invention before he even invests in completing it.

Not to mention that the system has produced a host of patent trolls, who just use the system to inhibit competition.

I understand that there is a large swamp which makes money on the patent system as it is, and which will defend it to the death. But I just dont buy the arguments that a 17 year government granted monopoly to the first person that applies to the government is fair at all.

FEE is not a monolithic organization. They publish articles from many sources and authors. Best not to have a collectivist mindset. Disagree with individuals.