And your analysis is accepted by most everyone here at FR until the protection from the government is called a “copyright” or a “patent” or “protection of intellectual property”, when all of a sudden, folks will jump up to defend life-of-author/artist plus 70 years, evergreening of drug patents, business-plan patents, pretending that algorithms are devices (and therefore patentable) rather than mathematical theorem, ... at which point calling something “property” makes it so, pro-business trumps pro-liberty.
Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution:
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
Sorry if you think the Constitution isn't pro-liberty enough for you.
No, it seems many on FR DON’T agree with the value of free trade over protectionism. A long discussion on this took place here...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3178001/posts
As far as tariffs being equivalent to patents, not really. The Constitution allows temporary patents for the promotion of Arts and Sciences. (”To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries” U.S. Const Art 1 Sec 8.)
That’s a lot different from tariffs lobbies to “protect” domestic business from competition.