Originally Posted by
Shaolin Wookie
Correct. Trade secrets are IP (not in a monopolistic sense), but they are "discoverable" by others. Again, if someone stumbled upon Coke's formula and then sold an identical product called Coka, or something, then there is no problem. The only problem that arises, from a rational-legal persepctive, is if someone discovers the formula--or something close to it--and then tries to sell you Coka as geniune "Coke." But again--that's not Coke's problem (it was in the past, however, since many people tried to defraud the public with false Coke products). It's the consumer's problem, and the consumer has the right to sue for fraud.
Now, the patent does give the patent-owner the power of aggression where no harm is leveraged in exchange. For instance, if I manage to figure out Coke's formula by playing around with flavors, then Coke retains the power to prevent me from using my goods (my flavors and my formula) for profit. I did nothing to harm them. Coke thereby obtains a property in mind, my memories, and in my physical resources. If I try to compete with Coke, then the government will shut me down by force, even though I did not threaten to harm Coke. Again--reduction of profits in the form of competition is not a form of aggression.
The patent is the medium of aggression. Government is the agent of aggression.