scholarly journals Intellectual Property In the Cathedral

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Burk
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Property Theory ◽  
Liability Rules

A variety of commentators have called for the increased application of liability rules, including compulsory licenses, to intellectual property. Such arguments are well taken, but unfortunately stop short of advocating the full range of potential intellectual property entitlement allocations. Property theory offers a range of allocative structures, including reverse liability rules and "put"-type entitlements that could be beneficially applied to intellectual property. This paper describes several such rules and argues for their consideration in the canon of intellectual property entitlements.

Intellectual Property: Theory, Privilege, and Pragmatism

2003 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam D. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Social Constructions ◽  
Property Theory ◽  
General Terms ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Definition Of

In the most general terms, this article focuses on the tension between competing justifications of intellectual property. Section I examines the nature and definition of economic pragmatism and argues that, while economic pragmatism comes in many flavors, each is either unstable or self-defeating. Section II advances the view that Anglo-American systems of intellectual property have both theoretical and pragmatic features. In Section III a sketch of a theory is offered--a theory that may limit applications of economic pragmatism and provide the foundation for copyright, patent, and trade secret institutions. To be justified--to warrant coercion on a worldwide scale--systems of intellectual property should be grounded in theory. Intellectual property rights are, in essence, no different than our rights to life, liberty, and tangible property. Intellectual property rights are neither pure social constructions nor bargains without foundations.

An IP Lawyer Walks Into a Bar

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Schruers
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Alcoholic Beverages ◽  
Property Theory ◽  
Market Strategies ◽  
Made In ◽  
Innovation Incentives

Matt Schruers demonstrates that from their earliest days as delivery mechanisms for medicines, to the era of patent elixirs, to today’s resurgence of craft cocktails, alcoholic beverages have been fruitful ground for innovation. Although cocktail recipes are unprotected by copyright or patent law, new cocktail recipes are far from scarce, despite the fact that these inventions can be freely copied and used by competitors. While culinary creations are regulated through informal norms, innovation in the mixological arts is driven by market strategies, in particular by cross-financing the investments made in easily copied information. Cocktails are often devised and sold as services, rather than products, as well as promotion for the spirits they contain. As this chapter colorfully illustrates, classic intellectual property theory often fails to account for market-based innovation incentives.

scholarly journals Contracting Around Liability Rules

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lemley
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Major Premise ◽  
Liability Rule ◽  
Liability Rules ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
Influential Paper ◽  
Do So

In his influential paper “Contracting Into Liability Rules: IntellectualProperty Rights and Collective Rights Organizations,” Rob Merges makes thecase that intellectual property (IP) owners vested with propertyentitlements can and do contract away their right to an injunction when itis efficient for them to do so. The result was to cement for many thesuperiority of property over liability rules, since Merges demonstrated aseemingly critical asymmetry between the two. Merges’s evidence suggestedthat if a judge or a legislature gets the damages calculation wrong, we arestuck with an inefficient liability rule, but that we weren’t similarlystuck with an inefficiently-allocated property rule.The evidence Merges brought to bear in his path-breaking article isextremely important. But it is incomplete. True, parties can contractaround inefficient property rules in IP cases. But as I show in this paper,they can - and do - contract around inefficient liability rules as well.The result does not prove the superiority of liability rules over propertyrules, but it does undermine a major premise that has been used to supportthe claim that IP rights must be protected by property rules.

GENESIS OF THE CONCEPT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

2021 ◽  
pp. 5-12
Author(s):  
N. A. Vitchkovskiy ◽  
◽  
V. A. Osipov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Limited Resources ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
Intellectual Activity ◽  
Property Theory ◽  
The Right ◽  
Exclusive Right ◽  
Dialectical Opposition

The growing importance of intellectual property as an economic asset raises the issue of the content of intellectual property in the scientific discussions and the identification of scientific prerequisites for the formation and development of the intellectual property theory. The paper aims at the improvement of the conceptual and theoretical views on the economic category of intellectual property through establishing the dialectical interrelation with the concept of property. The authors propose considering intellectual property as a materially expressed result of the mental (intellectual) activity of a person, which invests its creator (author) or legal entities with the exclusive right for it, and it is confirmed by the relevant officially issued protection documents (patents or certificates) or statutory prescribed copyright norms. The research revealed the dichotomous nature of intellectual property. The study of property and intellectual property categories allowed establishing their dialectical opposition in terms of materiality and possibility of copying a legal object, the urgency and territorial limitation of property rights, and, most important, the dynamics of value in the process of consumption. However, the property and intellectual property categories also have a dialectical unity, which is not noted in the scientific literature. It is expressed in the mechanism of origin of property rights (in both cases, they are related to the problem of limited resources resulting in the necessity to choose the variant of an asset use), and in the mechanism of application of these rights, associated with the presence of both the right and the restrictions of this right, as well as liabilities of a copyright holder.

Property Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eyal Zamir ◽  
Doron Teichman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Endowment Effect ◽  
Psychological Ownership ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Judicial Decision Making ◽  
Liability Rules

The chapter critically analyzes the contribution of behavioral findings to property law and theory. It starts with studies of basic notions, such as psychological ownership and the endowment effect; and moves on to discuss two major fields: constitutional property law and intellectual property. With regard to the former, the analysis shows how behavioral insights illuminate the distinction between governmental taking and giving of property, between physical and nonphysical takings, and between the taking of homes and other properties. With regard to intellectual property, the chapter deals, among other things, with inventors’ behavior and judicial decision-making in matters of intellectual property. Finally, the chapter discusses the broader issue of protecting entitlements through property rules versus liability rules.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document