Intellectual property[edit]

Main articles: Intellectual property and Intellectual property rights

Intellectual property (IP) encompasses expressions of ideas, thoughts, codes, and information.
"Intellectual property rights" (IPR) treat IP as a kind of real property, subject to analogous
protections, rather than as a reproducible good or service. Boldrin and Levine argue that
"government does not ordinarily enforce monopolies for producers of other goods. This is
because it is widely recognized that monopoly creates many social costs. Intellectual monopoly
is no different in this respect. The question we address is whether it also creates social benefits
commensurate with these social costs."[159]

International standards relating to Intellectual Property Rights are enforced through Agreement
on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. In the US, IP other than copyrights is
regulated by the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

The US Constitution included the power to protect intellectual property, empowering the
Federal government "to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited
times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries".
[160] Boldrin and Levine see no value in such state-enforced monopolies stating, "we ordinarily
think of innovative monopoly as an oxymoron.[161] Further, they comment, 'intellectual
property' "is not like ordinary property at all, but constitutes a government grant of a costly and
dangerous private monopoly over ideas. We show through theory and example that intellectual
monopoly is not necessary for innovation and as a practical matter is damaging to growth,
prosperity, and liberty".[160] Steelman defends patent monopolies, writing, "Consider
prescription drugs, for instance. Such drugs have benefited millions of people, improving or
extending their lives. Patent protection enables drug companies to recoup their development
costs because for a specific period of time they have the sole right to manufacture and distribute
the products they have invented."[162] The court cases by 39 pharmaceutical companies against
South Africa's 1997 Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Act, which intended
to provide affordable HIV medicines has been cited as a harmful effect of patents.[163][164]