Careful with the growth of the market for illegal and illicit products
For instance, when society awards intellectual property rights and is thereby expected to invest scarce resources enforcing them, there is an implicit assumption that these rights are to be reasonably exploited. When then one of these manmade properties rights is violated, like through pirated CDs, this might be the market answer to a lack of regulatory control over the monopoly. In this respect, under some circumstances, pirates and counterfeits could indeed perform a useful regulatory service to the society, like when vultures do the cleaning.
As the temptation-ratio to use a pirated good, defined as the potential savings in relation to the income per capita, is obviously larger in poor developing countries than in the rich developed countries, does this fact mean that the poor countries should have to invest relatively much more in fighting piracy?
Also though you need an original to create a fake parasite, who is to tell us that the original is not sometimes well served by the existence of its fakes? Might not the value and the number of buyers of truly original Louis Vuitton in fact be larger because all the rest of the world has to settle for fakes? Should then the pirates get a fee?
Another related issue and that needs much discussion is whether society is well served by criminalizing behaviors that are the subject of any significant social sanction, as in these Intellectual Property Right matters hypocrisy is truly rampant.
Finally, every time something is declared illegal or illicit by society an economic feasibility study should be required, not only to see if we can afford the enforcement, or if the protected should have to pay for the protection, but also, mucho more important, that we do not stimulate those markets to grow faster than our legal economies, as they could then turn into the more powerful.
Sent to FT November 18, 2005