In a world of governments that are freely chosen by individuals without having to change their locations, that is, a world of panarchies, a panarchy might have fractional-reserve banking be legal. In that case, a bank note is a security. If it is also used as money, that’s up to the people living in that panarchy.
Given that a bank note is a security, copying it is clearly fraudulent. That would be illegal in a panarchy that allowed fractional-reserve banking. If a panarchy allowed banks to develop freely with a variety of kinds of securities issued by the bank, such free banking would likely generate some fractional-reserve banking.
In a Blockian libertarian panarchy, there would not be fractional-reserve banking, under the theory that it’s fraudulent. This is only one of many potential panarchies. In that specific case, copying a note raises the question of the legality of copying an illegal note. In this case, creating a fractional-reserved banknote is illegal. If a person outside the bank copied such a note and passed it on to an unwitting person, that too would be illegal, in my opinion, because it’s doing exactly what the bank is doing and what the bank is doing is illegal in the Blockian libertarian panarchy.
If we had a world of complete monetary freedom, under competing panarchies, competition would determine the laws adopted and the economic results. The market would decide whether or not fractional-reserve banking was acceptable. If it were, copying of banknotes would be an attempt to pass off a counterfeit security, one that had no delineated claim or rights, for a real security that would have legal claims and rights. That is why copying of such notes would be fraudulent. This has nothing to do with intellectual property at all.
3:54 pm on May 2, 2017
