I figured out why my independent study (on copyrights in the digital world) has been stressing me out so much: the issues raised are extremely difficult to reconcile for someone with a strong libertarian bent.

You see, I believe that free expression is the cornerstone of an ideal society….I’ve spent a healthy chunk of my time at Tuck trying to encourage more free expression through satire or knowledge-sharing (teaser: I am also involved with a start-up that will provide individuals with powerful tools to use information to effect change).

At the same time, I believe that property rights are critical in any society that values freedom. Without property rights, we sink into collectivist hell….no individual responsibility, no privacy, etc.

It is these two values–free expression and property rights–which are at war in any discussion about copyrights. I’ve been reading Lawrence Lessig and I find myself falling in love with his ideas about the future of creativity in America–that excessive power in the hands of copyright holders is severely restrictive to creative endeavors. But then I read Ayn Rand’s essay on the issue, which says “patents and copyrights are the legal implementation of the base of all property rights: a man’s right to the product of his mind.”

How to resolve this paradox?

Should YouTube be allowed to make money off copyrighted content that users post to its site? Doesn’t seem right. But YouTube has plenty of legitimate uses (click here to see the videos I’ve posted to YouTube). What if the technology for filtering (fingerprinting, for instance) hasn’t caught up with the technology for posting videos? Should content generators (like Viacom, who recently sued for $1 billion) be compensated?

YouTube shouldn’t be destroyed…after all, without YouTube, the networks probably wouldn’t innovate towards the online space, and let’s face it, all content should be available online. Now NBC (GE), Fox (NewsCorp), Viacom, CBS, Comcast and many others are developing strategies for online content distribution. If the goal is to encourage innovation (and that should be the goal), then we can’t punish the YouTube’s too harshly.

This is a very tough question. I’m looking forward to discussing in Ethics tomorrow.