Did Cory Doctorow's explanation address valuing intellectual property via Harberger taxes?
No, like any other property tax, its a user fee for the government service of excluding others from whatever exclusive rights are granted under law for the class of property at issue.
IP doesn't limit or license thought, and a tax on IP doesn't tax thought.
If you want the government to protect against other people making certain applications of similar thoughts to the ones you’ve had, then you want IP protection, and that protection is what a tax on IP applies to.
How else does such a person learn to discover or create without his thoughts? Taxing IP is taxing the discoveries and the works of a person. Ergo taxing IP is taxing one's thoughts.
“private contracts” aren't an enforcement mechanism, they are a basis for government enforcement.
That aside, no, IP (and property generally) isn't a user fee, its the privilege of excluding others from some conduct relating to the subject of the property right.
A tax on property is a user fee on the service of providing and enforcing that privilege.
False. "IP" is the right to exclude other people from using such work.
What is?
> In addition, it's possible to have intellectual property without requiring government influence on someone's thoughts. Case in point, trade secrets.
Nobody is proposing that keeping stuff in your head is going to be illegal or taxed. What would be taxed is puting stuff out in the world and then telling people what they are allowed to do with it. That is only possible by using threats of force or the implied threats of force embodied bybour legal system.
Also, all other actual IP.