journalism


The 2004 movie [*Kinsey*](http://imdb.com/title/tt0362269/) brought an understandable renewed interest in
the work of Alfred Kinsey. But anyone who lives in Bloomington for a
while knows the basics about him: That he usually sported a bowtie; that
he became famous as a sex researcher (in many ways the first sex
researcher); that he did his work on the Bloomington campus of Indiana
University; and that the institute for for sex research that he
founded and which now bears his name lives on to this day — a tribute
to his determination and that of then IU President Herman Wells. Oh, and that the Institute houses one of the largest
collections of “pornography” in the world (more on that below).

I was vaguely aware of the IU/sex research relationship when I moved
to Bloomington in 1992, but by the following year I was very well
aware of the basic details described above. However, here in 2006 I
had never been to the Institute, nor did I even know where it was
located, even though I am amicably acquainted with its Director and
her husband (it’s certainly an exaggeration to say that everyone in
Bloomington knows everyone else… but it’s not a ridiculous
exaggeration).

Well, leave it to the highly motivated and highly effective founder of
the new polyamory group in Bloomington to blaze me a path to the
Institute’s door after fourteen years. Much to the delight of me and
many of my fellow members, she just called them up and asked if we
could take a tour. Sure! And, so it was that some of the mystery of
The Kinsey Institute was unveiled.

(more…)

I was a chubby kid, but ever since puberty, I’ve been fortunate that the mix of recreational interests that I’ve had have apparently been enough exercise to keep my weight under control, even for as much as I like to eat (and you can read that “as much…” clause in two different ways, both of which are true). I’ve never engaged in exercise specifically for my health, although I’m certainly glad that there are activities that I enjoy doing (dancing, biking, frisbee…) that count as exercise even if I’m doing them for fun. So, I don’t think about my weight that much. I’m lucky.

Having said all of that, I do realize that not being focused on something is a good recipe for letting it get out of one’s control, and memories of having problems with my weight as a child keep me worried that I could have trouble in the future. Fortunately for me, my own father has a theory about healthy weight-management with which I’ve really jumped on board: “I don’t care how much you weigh, but you should weigh that amount every year.” Suppose you gain two pounds per year. That works out to less than three ounces per month, basically imperceptable. But, if you did that for 25 years, you’d weigh 50 pounds more than you do now. I will not feel at all good about my weight in 25 years if I weight 50 pound more than I do now.

So, the theory says, you’ve got to have a baseline that you keep coming back to. You’ve got to make sure that you don’t fall into this imperceptable creep. Once a year you’ve got to weigh the baseline amount. You pick the date. You pick the weight. But, if you’re not there, do something to get there, every year.

Ok. Now, again, I’m not worried about weighing too much now, so I decided a couple of years ago to set my baseline weight a few pounds more than I weighed at that moment. (Out of respect for the idea that one’s weight is a private matter, I shall not give any absolutely numbers in this public forum. Suffice it to say that the baseline was an amount I’d be perfectly comfortable weighing for the rest of my life). So, I signed up for the plan, and started weight myself more often, which turned out to be about once every three months.

What I found was that my weight varied more than I would have expected it to. The first winter after I started paying attention, I was actually a few pounds over my baseline, which surprised me. I thought “I might actually have to go on a diet”. I decided that I’d set my date for the summer, when it’d be easy to convince myself to increase my exercise level, and lots of fresh vegetables are in season.

What I found, though, was that in the Spring, without even trying, I had dropped back down in weight to a few pounds under my baseline. And, I stayed at about that rate until the next winter, when it went up again.

I don’t know how long this has been going on, but this year I felt motivated to pay some attention to it. Somewhere around the beginning of 2006, I found myself weighing about five pound over my baseline. That caused me some concern. I decided I’d reduce my intake of pop (man, what a fast way to ingest calories pop is!) and have been doing that for months. I don’t know how many, but enough that’d I’d weighed myself a couple of times since then (and I’d say never twice within three weeks), and didn’t notice any real change.

Then suddenly, this past week I weighed myself and I was about three pounds under my baseline. So, something like 6-8 pounds lost, with practically no variation in diet or exercise habits. What gives? And the pattern seems pretty clearly defined: every Winter I put on weight, every Spring it comes back off.

So, I can’t help but ask the question: could there be a seasonal thing going on in humans with their weight?

I did a cursory web search, but this is a hard subject to study on the web. The problem, of course, is that it’s hard to get past the countless self-help weight-loss guides and stuff. Basically, I found a lot of articles about the food served at Xmas parties, but practically nothing about biology.

It’s certainly possible that the holidays have something to do with my weight fluctuation. But, it just doesn’t seem that likely. Yes, my family feasts over the holidays, but that’s only a couple of meals, and I certainly do a fair amount of feasting in my normal existence. Yes, I attend holiday parties, but I attend parties all the time, and there’s always fat-filled finger food and alcohol there, and I don’t feel that I indulge any differently in November and December than I do normally. I could be wrong. Maybe I do and don’t realize it.

But, here’s the opposing case. I’m a relatively good sample set for this experiement. I weigh myself on the same scale, and do my best to keep it well zeroed (it is a pretty crappy scale, so that’s one weakness of my research methods). I eat two meals a day with limited snacking. For lunch, I typically eat at one of the many restaurants near where I work, and this is true throughout the year, and they certainly don’t vary their portion sizes in accord with the season. Dinners are more often than not food that I prepared, and I like eating until I feel a sensation of being “full”. Some things change about the kinds of foods that I eat in the Winter vs. the Spring, but I don’t know how much they’d matter. The most obvious thing is that in the Winter I make more soup, which I don’t consider to be at all bad for me. Throughout the year, but especially when vegetables are good, I make a lot of “stir fries” (interpretting that broadly), and while many people think that vegetable oil is not really bad for you, there’s no question that there’s more fat in my home-fried food than there is in soup, right?

As for activity, well, I haven’t been particularly active recently. As I just wrote in a previous post, I biked more in January and February than I did in March and April. I did some serious binge-dancing at the Pigtown Fling in late March, but come on… And besides, I danced just as hard at Winter Warmup in December, and in general my dance habits haven’t changed much.

So, what I’m suggesting (totally without proof) is that there’s something else going on inside me. I’m not suggesting anything supernatural. But, I think scientists tend to model our bodies as machines more than as animals, and I think this evidences itself in attitudes about nutrition and exercise. I do believe that one will lose weight if one burns more calories than one ingests, but it’s hard to know how many calories one is burning. And, in general, I think many people maintain a stable weight even while ingesting more than they burn. One simple possibility would be that we don’t actually digest all that we ingest. Our GI tract could just let some calories pass through us through its involuntary work. And, if it did that, it doesn’t seem at all unresonable to me that it might vary the amount based on the season. Many if not most living things native to non-equatorial regions have some instinctual sense of the season. Why could this not be true of humans? It doesn’t have to be the GI tract thing, that’s just a random speculation. But, my body does all kinds of things in digesting foods, and I don’t understand them, and there would seem to be countless ways that my cells could do different things with the nutrition I present then that would cause fluctuations in my weight.

I don’t know if this is true or not. Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. For all I know, it may even be accepted fact among scientists, and I just can’t find their work. I doubt it, though. But, I invite everyone to offer evidence and theory of any kind in support of or opposition to this proto-theory.

I love voting. I like the whole idea of it, I like doing it, it gives me warm fuzzy feelings. Mmhmm.. This coming Tuesday, May 2, is a primary election day. It is not that easy to find information about our local elections in general, but certainly not for the primaries. So, here’s a quick and dirty voter guide.

The State of Indiana’s contribution to the information pool is [this repository of official filings and stuff](http://www.in.gov/sos/elections/), the most useful part of which is [this list of registered candidates](http://www.in.gov/sos/elections/pdfs/2006Primary_Website_Candidate_List.pdf).

Since Indiana has closed primaries (which a lot of people gripe about, but makes sense to me) the best information resource for the May 2 election is probably the local party websites. The [Monroe County Democrats](http://www.monroedems.org/) maintain a nice [index of their candidates](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php). Sadly, the [Monroe County Republicans website](http://www.mocogop.com/index.cfm) has no such list. So, local Republicans probably have to go from the State’s list, and manually search for each candidate. I would do that if I were planning on voting Republican in the primary, but I’m not, so I won’t.

By the way, from what I can tell, neither the Green Party nor the Libertarian Party runs a primary.

##Contested Races in the Monroe County Democratic Primary

There are only a few contested elections in the Monroe County Democratic Primary Ballot. Here they are, with whatever candidate web sites I could find:

###Monroe County Sheriff
Everyone in Monroe County will be voting for this.

* [William Brown](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=54) [Home Page](http://www.billbrownforsheriffmonroecounty.com/)
* [Jim Kennedy](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=40) [Home Page](http://www.jimkennedyforsheriff.com/pages/1/index.htm)
* [Larry Smith](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=37) [Home Page](http://www.larrysmithforsheriff.com/index.html)

###Monroe County Circuit Court Judge, Division V
I’m pretty sure everyone in Monroe County will be voting for this too.

* [Valeri Haughton](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=33) [Home Page](http://valerihaughton.com/)
* [Alphonso Manns](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=38) [Home Page](http://www.mannslaw.com/index.html)
* [Robert “Bob” Miller](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=34)

###Monroe County Council, District 4
The only contested County Council district in the Democratic Primary is this one, which is roughly the City of Bloomington ([this map gives more detail](http://www.jilllesh.com/images/district4map.gif)).

* [Bill Hayden](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=51)
* [Jill Lesh](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=43) [Home Page](http://www.jilllesh.com/)

###United States Representative, District 9
Most everyone in Monroe County is in this district. It’s one of the very few contested House Seats in the nation, presently held by Republican [Mike Sodrel](http://sodrel.house.gov/), who beat out Baron Hill in 2004 by fewer that 2000 votes (out of almost 300,000 votes cast).

* [Gretchen Clearwater](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=31) [Home Page](http://www.clearwaterforcongress.com/)
* [Baron Hill](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=11) [Home Page](http://www.bringbackbaron.com/)

###United States Representative, District 4
But, a few people in Monroe County (on the far west edge) are in this district (presently held by Republican [Steve Buyer](http://stevebuyer.house.gov/)).

* [Rick Cornstuble](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=58)
* [David Sanders](http://www.monroedems.org/candidates.php?id=44) [Home Page](http://www.sandersforcongress.org/)

[Gene Hubert at a dance](http://www.newsobserver.com/cgi-bin/nao/obits/show_details.cgi?id=115948)
Last night I called a [contra dance in Indianapolis](http://indycontra.org). A few days earlier, a friend of mine from Indy emailed me pointing out that legendary contra dance choreographer, caller, and dancer [Gene Hubert had died](http://www.newsobserver.com/cgi-bin/nao/obits/show_details.cgi?id=115948). I had heard that he had been diagnosed with [pancreatic cancer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancreatic_Cancer) and was very ill, but I had not heard about his death on March 6. He was 51 years of age. This is obviously a terribly sad event for Gene’s family, but I don’t know any of them. What I do know is that Gene’s dances are some of the most frequently called in modern contradancing (at least in the Midwest), and that this stems immediately from the fact that they are so smooth and so fun.

Glenn Augenstein called an entire program of dances by Gene at the [contra dance in Louisville](http://www.louisvillecontradancers.org) on Monday night, and I decided to follow his lead and the suggestion of my friend and do the same last night. It’s caused a good deal reflection for me about everything from what makes Gene’s dances so good to how the great people in the American contra dance community have contributed to the joy of others. Gene was a member of a very small group of contra dancers about whom I am prone to use the word “legendary”. The fact that he is gone at age 51 is a tragedy. At the same time, his dances are likely to be part of my life for as long as I continue to live.

Thank you, Gene. On behalf of all of us.

Back on January 25 I wrote a post I called
[The question is: why no warrant?](http://davidernst.net/blog/2006/01/25/the-question-is-why-no-warrant/), referring to the NSA’s “domestic spying” program. Now I sit reading a [Reason Magazine](http://reason.com)
interview with NSA whistleblower Russell Tice. Wow. I can’t believe this didn’t bigger coverage. I can’t believe it didn’t get more prominent placement inside this magazine! But, whatever the case, I’m feeling a bit smug after reading Mr. Tice’s closing words of the Interview:

>There’s no reason the two thousand warrants could not have been done through the FISA court. The
>question is: Why wasn’t it done?

I mean, that’s just about as close to exactly what I said as you can get! Of course, all signs I see point to [Feingold’s censure resolution being defeated without much of a hearing](http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/14142031.htm). I sure don’t know much about presidential censure, but the self-described Republican who voted for Bush but later blew this whistle on the program used what seems to me to be much stronger language:

>Well, some time ago, we impeached a president for cheating on his wife, which as far as I’m concerned
>should’ve been between his family, his wife, and if he believes in one his God upstairs. When it comes to
>high crimes and misdemeanors, knowingly and willingly doing *this* and then being arrogant about it and
>saying we’re going to continue doing it—I would certainly think falls into that category of high crimes.

He also apparently has stories that he wants to tell congress about but won’t tell to the press because it’s too sensitive. I really recommend reading the Interview.

And, you silly Democratic congress people… focus on the missing warrants, not on the eavesdropping. Warrants!!!! I mean, you should say the word “warrant” twice for every time you say the word “spy” or “rights”. “The executive branch absolutely has the right to do this kind of thing, as long as they **get a warrant**.” Warrant Warrant Warrant!!! You can’t say it too much!!! Don’t let the White House control the discussion with talk like this (from Scott McClellan [quoted
here](http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/11277)):

“[The censure motion] has more to do
with 2008 politics than anything else. I think it does raise the question
of how do you fight and win the war on terrorism, and if Democrats want
to argue that we shouldn’t be listening to al-Qaeda communications, that’s their right.”

I’ll say it again, just about like Russell Tice said it: **The question is: why no warrants?**

It ain’t what you do, it’s the way that you do it.

I was surprised when I first heard about this Dubai Ports World (DPW) thing. It didn’t seem like Bush to approve of the fact that several American seaport terminals would be operated by a firm run by the government of an Arab nation. But, only a few news reports later, I grew to agree with the President, that this is a perfectly acceptable thing. I even agree that it would send a bad message to reject the deal, and I *even* agree with his suggestion that racism is driving a good deal of the criticism.

In case you haven’t heard much about this, I’ll quickly go over my rationale: previously unbeknownst to me (and, seemingly, most Americans, most notably those who serve in Congress) the majority of our port terminals are already owned and operated by foreign firms. The US government oversees security at all of them, and does their own checks, unrelated to whoever’s running the port. DPW is not a fly-by-night operation, it’s one of the largest and most-respected companies in the field. I think a case could be made that
we shouldn’t have foreign companies running these ports, that it would improve national security to have them managed by American firms or even (dare I suggest it?) the US Government. But, if one believes that, one should be advocating a complete overhaul of the system, because the number I remember is: 80% of the terminals are already foreign-owned. So, the question before us is: is there any reason to single out DPW? And, unless you are racist or otherwise believe that all Arab countries hate the US equally (even those who are allowing the US to launch attacks on other Arab countries from their soil, as the United Arab Emerates are), I can’t understand why you’d think this company should be singled out. And even if Congress can convince American voters that excluding DPW makes sense here, I can’t imagine that this wouldn’t become a huge selling point to radical Islamic groups who want to promote the idea that the US just hates Arabs. We don’t need any more fuel on that flame…

So, look! President Bush and I really see eye to eye on this one, and most of Congress disagrees with both of us. This may be a first in the six years of this Presidency.

Well, just in case the President has one of his staff keep up on my blog (go ahead and take a few minutes to laugh at that notion… I did), I’ll offer some free advice on where he did our shared cause wrong. Basically it comes down to this: People don’t like you to say “just trust us!” If there was ever a time when the President could get away with that, it hasn’t been in my lifetime (I was born during the Nixon administration). When news of this first broke, the President took his typical stance, something like “we checked it out, you shouldn’t worry about it.” I don’t like it. Usually I disapprove of what he’s advocating, but here I am agreeing with him, and I still don’t like it. And neither does Congress. And he should know better.

So, we’re in this sad state of affairs. Between Democrats who just want to take him to task for anything, and Republicans who are probably shoring up their racist voter bases, Congress is going crazy about this. Ideally, the President should have revealed this in a short speech, explaining things like how many ports are already foreign-owned, and why this company should be considered just as trustworthy as all the rest of them. But, the press got to it before he could spin it, so he starts by playing catch up. Then instead of saying “look, I can understand why this sounds like a bad idea at first blush, but here’s the case for why it’s really a good idea..” and then pelting Congress and the press with all the evidence that the executive branch’s review dug up, he just says “we checked it out, it’s fine, don’t question it.”

Bad move, Mr. President. And it’s too bad, because I agree with you on this one. After the dust settles, maybe we can chat about why it’s philosophically wrong for the US government to be involved in things that could be run by private companies, but the same doesn’t apply to foreign governments. That issue’s too subtle to be talking about right now, though. For now, why don’t you be very open with all the information that you have, encourage Congress to do their review quickly and fairly, and tell the American people that you’re confident that the Congressional review will result in the same recommendation that you’re offering. In short, send the message “you don’t have to trust me. I welcome scrutiny, because this stands up to scrutiny.” But, I know, that’s not your style.

I was trying to find out when my recycling pickup day was (I really don’t think I got one of the magnets this year) and I happened upon this Notice from the City of Bloomington that says that we only need to sort recyclables into TWO piles now:

1. Paper Products
2. Metal Cans, Glass Containers and Plastic Bottles

This is down from the three that was used to. I guess they figured out a way to separate plastic from metal and glass (doesn’t sound too hard when you put it that way).

Offered here as a public service announcement…

An open letter to Bloomington Lefties:

As I’m sure you know, [Ann Coulter](http://www.anncoulter.com) will be [speaking at the IU Auditorium](http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/2841.html) on February 23. I have a suspicion that some of you are planning on staging some kind of demonstration which will interrupt her time on stage. I implore you not to do this. There are two reasons I think this would be a bad idea: 1) it won’t do any good, and 2) it will do bad. At the very least, consider what good you hope will be accomplished by such a demonstration.

Do you have a vision of calling out a few words that will leave Ms. Coulter speechless and embarrassed, exposing the vacuity of her arguments? It will not happen. She’s heard it all before, and she’s very comfortable dismissing it. She’s probably already got a come-back line prepared for anything you might say. This woman is no slouch.

Do you just feel the need to let the world know that not everyone at IU agrees with her? Don’t worry, the world knows. If you feel you must express yourself, there are much better ways to tell this to the world. Write about it in your blog or something. :)

Do you have a hope that there will be interesting political debate at this talk? Ridiculous. I mean, first of all, it’s a lecturespeech, it’s not a debate. Who would she debate? You? Interrupting her time with catcalls? Ridiculous. But, even worse, this is a woman who wrote a book called *How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)*. Read it, and you’ll find that the way she recommends talking to a liberal is by making sure they don’t have a chance to talk (she makes the preposterous claim that liberals don’t want to talk in anything more than soundbites… In my experience, most liberals want to overtalk their subject matter… but I digress), by ignoring any compliments that they offer, and making sure that they get angry. And, I mean, the title of her talk (which I, in the great tradition of Dave Barry, must assure you that I am not making up) is with “Liberals Are Wrong About Everything!” (I presume, but do not know, that the exclamation point is included by her). Does this sound like a forum for reasonable debate?

I guess those are about the only reasons I can think of that you might think it would do good. Let’s talk about why it will do bad.

I disagree with Ms. Coulter on the vast majority of subjects, but there are quite a few things about which we agree. One of them is that interrupting someone’s well-deserved time on stage is rude. Now, there may be times when being rude is called for, but this is not one of them. Ms. Coulter is a well-known author and political thinker (yes, that’s right, she *is* a political thinker) and there is absolutely no reason that she shouldn’t be welcomed to speak at any university.

Ms. Coulter is also extremely skilled at rallying support for her cause by demonizing people who are rude to conservatives. So, just stay out of the trap. Stage a demonstration and I bet you anything that after you are escorted away by security, the Auditorium will rockin’ loud with first-pumping conservatives, feeling justifiably pleased that Ms. Coulter was allowed to continue. But it won’t stop there. Ms. Coulter will simply add the experience to a long list of examples she has of why Liberals are all bad. The fact that this would be using your actions to inappropriately represent everyone in the Democratic party and politically left of them will not slow her down one bit. She’s a master of this. (After listening to the first couple of chapters of *How to Talk to a Liberal (if you must)*, I noticed I was starting to feel guilty about my affair with Monica Lewinsky. “Oh, right! That wasn’t me!”)

I could go on, but hopefully you get the point. Now, some of you might feel like you should attend to be exposed to different ideas. I sympathize with that, and perhaps you should. This is part of what led me to [listen to one of her books](http://davidernst.net/blog/2005/10/31/an-ann-coultermichael-moore-experience/) on tape. You might want to save some time and just read a few items off of her [website](http://www.anncoulter.com). But if you do go, don’t expect it to be anything other than what it will. She is vitriolic. She is the epitome of liberal bashing. She has no compunction about it. Be prepared to be hit with an onslaught of insults for believing what you believe, and set your sites no higher than to hope to weed through all of that to actually hear some of the reason behind her beliefs. Yes, she has reasons, and some of them even make some sense to me. I just wish that she would talk about them without being so insulting. But hey, she wouldn’t sell nearly as many books that way, would she?

If you really feel you must protest, I recommend simply standing outside the auditorium with signs that say something like “We welcome Ann Coulter even though we disagree with her” and pass out leaflets with well-reasoned arguments against her positions along with links to her website and some of your choosing. But really, I recommend just not going. You’re not going to convince conservatives or even moderates or undecideds to believe what you believe by interrupting her talk. The idea that you might succeed at that makes about as much sense as thinking that the we will discourage Anti-American sentiments and behaviors in Muslims by attacking Islamic countries with the US military.

P.S. After formulating most of this blog post in my head, I happened across [this columnist’s take on the same thing](http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.php?adid=search&id=33809) in the IDS. Our reasoning is not the same, but the result is: Just don’t go.

Cleaning my house a bit, I decided to put on some music, which turned out to be Chuck Berry. During a song called “You Can’t Catch Me” I was very surprised to hear him sing “Here come old flattop, he come groovin’ up..” What?? Must consult The Orb.

Needless to say, a Google search did not disappoint. That page actually says “John famously lifted” the line (originally “he was movin’ up with me”), which of course makes me feel like I should have known. (I kind of like that use of the word “famously” which I’ve felt a bit attuned to since NPR reported, on the occassion of the death of the “Queen Mother”, that she “famously” said during WWII that she wouldn’t move to the US because “The children can’t go without me, I can’t go without the King, and he can’t go.” I like that line too…) Anyway, if it’s supposed to be known famously, then I should spread the word, right? Mostly I just thought it was remarkable that such a signature line was not even original.

(I just can’t write a simple blog entry, can I?)

I find our nation’s relationship with intellectual property
troubling. So, when I hear or read news coverage about the issue, my
ire is frequently raised. This happened this evening when I heard this quote (which you too can hear) from Vergil Daugherty on *Marketplace*:

>If you’re a capitalist, if you believe in free markets, then the [US
>Patent] system is working fine, and I don’t see anything broken with
>it at all.

Mr. Daugherty is the CEO of Economic Inventions LLC, and he holds
[this
patent](http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1=5884286.WKU.&OS=PN/5884286&RS=PN/5884286)
on a trading idea that some people are calling XPOs — expirationless
options.

(I had a hard time finding that patent (I hope the [US Patent
and Trademark Office’s website](http://www.uspto.gov) doesn’t get
nominated for any usability awards), mostly because I didn’t know how
to spell the guy’s name. I still can’t find anything about the other
inventor they interviewed, whose name sounded to me like “Judd
Bowman”, but must be something else, because they said he held a
patent and the uspto.gov site showed no patents by that name.
Definitely a weakness of radio.)

I’m sure not an expert on these things, and reading the actual patent
application wasn’t very enlightening to me. But I did find three
other references to his patent on the web. First I found [this
one](http://www.hbs.edu/research/facpubs/workingpapers/papers2/0001/01-005.pdf),
which is an academic paper that suggests that Mr. Daugherty’s
invention offered practically nothing new beyond ideas that had been
presented in the academic literature of economics decades ago. That
idea was echoed in the [second article that I
found](http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=21479513),
although it certainly saw it a bit more favorably. The [third
article](http://www.inc.com/magazine/20031201/rcringely.html) was by
far the most informative, and also the most favorable to
Mr. Daugherty’s patent.

I am skeptical (at best) of software patents, business practice
patents, and other “soft” patents that aren’t actual hardware
inventions. Actually, I’m skeptical of almost all patents, especially
those issued in the Internet era. This one is certainly no exception.
There seems to be reasonable doubt as to whether Mr. Daugherty’s idea
should have qualified for a patent under current US law. But, I
personally am in no position to assert anything about that.

What interests me more is the underlying philosophical issue relating
to intellectual property and economics. What upset me about
Mr. Daugherty’s comment was equating belief in free markets and
patents. Patents are clearly government interference in the
marketplace. At risk of exposing my lack of understanding of
Mr. Daugherty’s invention, I’ll use it to illustrate why:

Suppose I need some cash, but for some
reason I don’t want to sell some stock I own in Acme, Inc. right now (maybe I
want to attend Acme’s annual shareholder meeting…). So, I
offer to sell an option to buy it at a given price, at ANY time in the
future (no expiration date). If anyone buys that from me, I believe I
would owe a royalty to Mr. Daugherty. If I don’t pay it, he could sue
me. If I don’t comply with the suit, I’ll eventually get the police
after me (for contempt of court, or something).

This type of contract sure doesn’t seem very complicated. It’s
probably been done before. It’s certainly been written about before.
And yet, now, because of our intellectual property laws, the coercive
power of the government is behind the idea that I should have to pay a
patent holder just for carrying out this transaction. That is not a
free market.

Mr. Daugherty could have taken a more free market approach. He could
have just started a business specializing in such transactions,
written computer software that would have enabled such transactions,
and otherwise consulted with people on the value of this kind of
transaction. If the idea has merit, he should have had little trouble
making money this way. He would have saved the undoubtedly huge
amounts of money and energy he spent securing the patent. And the
idea would have been available in the marketplace much sooner.
However, his potential earnings are *much* greater with the patent,
which of course is why he took the trouble of getting it. By bringing
the government into the equation, his potential for getting rich
skyrockets.

So, my point (like my orginal vision of this post) is actually simple:
patents are government interventions in markets. A case can be made
that they are worthwhile interventions, and there might even be some
extent to which I would agree with that. But in his statement,
Mr. Daugherty, in my opinion, is confusing “free market” with “good
for entrepeneurs”. They are not the same thing.

« Previous PageNext Page »