scholarly journals The Role of Patent Law in Knowledge Codification

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Burk
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Tacit Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Codified Knowledge ◽  
Know How ◽  
Knowledge Codification ◽  
Prior Art ◽  
Property Regimes

Recent studies of knowledge production have increasingly recognized the role of codified knowledge in the operation of social organizations. But the literature on knowledge production has to date recognized only in passing the role of intellectual property in this process. This paper applies the insights of knowledge production to the features of intellectual property regimes, both to flesh out the analysis of tacit knowledge codification, and to illuminate the role of intellectual property in the firm. Patents, for example, constitute an explicitly codified form of technical knowledge, providing a stable common code for technical know-how, partially ameliorating the risks associated with loss of tacit knowledge. Codification through the patent system also provides important stability to attendant tacit knowledge. Patent doctrines regarding prior art, interference practice, and infringement all address the balance of tacit and codified knowledge. By functioning as a codification mechanism, patents may facilitate employee movement and entrepreneurial business spin-offs. Thus, aside from the usual justifications for patents in terms of incentive or disclosure, patenting may help to secure knowledge against loss or dissipation.

Live Coding the Law: Improvisation, Code, and Copyright

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Zeilinger
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Electronic Music ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Programming Environments ◽  
Intellectual Property Policy ◽  
Improvised Music ◽  
The Law ◽  
Cultural Commons ◽  
Property Regimes

This article concerns the emerging creative practice of live coding (i.e., the real-time programming of electronic music in text-based programming environments), and explores how this practice can be deployed as a tactic of resistance against the overreach of restrictive intellectual property policy. I begin by surveying definitions of copyright and patent law, and related issues, to situate live coding in the field of existing perspectives on cultural ownership. Drawing on legal theory and critical discourse on improvised music in other genres, I then argue that the dynamic, palimpsestic, and improvisational qualities of live coding contradict many of copyright law's core assumptions regarding the nature of “fixed” works of art. These contradictions can be usefully mobilized for the purpose of resisting legal and economic enclosures of the digital cultural commons. As I conclude, live coding can, from its current, inherently ambivalent position on copyright matters, develop a strong, performance-based critical stance against the imbalances and shortcomings of intellectual property regimes and outdated notions of exclusive cultural ownership. Integrating artistic practices with ongoing and emerging critiques of intellectual property, such resistance can go a long way towards highlighting readily available opportunities to oppose and confound the law.

scholarly journals Appropriation under Low Intellectual Property Regimes: The Role of Communities in the Online Alternative Adult Entertainment Industry1

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 71-80
Author(s):  
Kim-Marlène LE ◽  
Julien PÉNIN
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Sunk Costs ◽  
Entertainment Industry ◽  
Online Pornography ◽  
User Communities ◽  
Production And Distribution ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Property Regimes ◽  
Property Regime

The online adult entertainment industry, as Darling (2014) showed, is a new case of low intellectual property regime, i.e. largely inefficient in preventing the massive copying of content. In this paper, we focus on alternative pornography and explore the mechanisms which contribute to the creation of pornographic content. We argue that user communities help content providers to absorb sunk costs associated with content production and distribution. Our main conclusion is that, although user communities cannot solve alone the incentive failure in online pornography, they complement and reinforce strategies which enable content producers to earn revenues from vulnerable copyrighted works.

AGREEMENTS ON THE DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY RIGHTS TO THE OBJECTS OF PATENT LAW AND «KNOW-HOW»: NEWS OF LEGISLATION

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliia Kanaryk ◽  
◽  
Vladyslav Nosinskyi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Compulsory Licensing ◽  
Real Cost ◽  
Know How ◽  
Cost Of Drugs ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to the review of novelties of the legislation in the part of disposition of property rights to objects of patent law and know-how. Based on the analysis of the existing legislation, it is established that there is an exclusive list of the following agreements: license to use the object of intellectual property rights; license agreement; agreement on the creation by order and use of the object of intellectual property rights; agreement on the transfer of exclusive intellectual property rights; another agreement on the disposal of intellectual property rights. It is noted that the agreement on the transfer (use) of «know-how» differs from that for the patent. The basis for granting the right to use «know-how» is not an exclusive right, but a de facto monopoly on the object of the agreement. «Know-how» in contrast to the patented invention can not be used without receiving it from the owner. The consequence of this is the need not only to grant the right of use under the contract, but also the transfer of the «knowhow» in full. It is noted that the legislator has significantly simplified the contractual procedures for granting the right to dispose of property rights for pharmaceutical companies due to the need to combat the pandemic. Lists of substances and medical procedures, medical equipment that cannot be the subject of patent protection have been established. It is emphasized that the legislator does not take into account the current level of digitalization, where the right to own or use intellectual property is certified by numerous electronic methods. For example, by confirming electronic licenses, user terms, affiliate programs with a number of intermediaries. Accordingly, it is necessary to expand the list of possible reliable ways of certifying contracts, which could be considered written or be equated to such a way. The bill №5552, which proposes amendments to the law «On Copyright and Related Rights», in terms of combating «patent trolling» was analyzed. The authors of the bill propose a number of administrative procedures that will help to respond quickly to such unfair actions of competitors. At the same time, it is noted that with the expansion of the contractual procedure, some of these cases could be avoided. It is proposed, as part of the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, to introduce compulsory licensing, in order to reduce the real cost of drugs against the virus, as well as the logistics of specialized hospitals.

scholarly journals An Interview with Jacob H. Rooksby, Dean of Gonzaga University School of Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Micah Zeller ◽  
Tucker Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Critical Examination ◽  
University Campus ◽  
American Mind ◽  
Know How ◽  
Student Entrepreneurship ◽  
Higher Education Law ◽  
Special Collections

In this interview, Jacob Rooksby discusses his work and research in intellectual property and higher education law, including a critical examination of the role of copyright on the modern university campus. The conversation, with the Journal of Copyright in Education and Librarianship’s (JCEL) Micah Zeller and Tucker Taylor, covers trends concerning student entrepreneurship, faculty ownership, donor-imposed restrictions in special collections, and why everyone involved—from trustees, administrators, instructors, students, and library staff—should care and know how law and policies affect their interests. The discussion draws on Rooksby’s 2016 book, The Branding of the American Mind: How Universities Capture, Manage, and Monetize Intellectual Property and Why It Matters, which describes problematic practices of institutions, opportunities for those working in this space, and how intellectual property issues connect to our moral expectations for higher education. Professor Rooksby also flags areas for readers to keep an eye on in the future.

scholarly journals A Research Framework on Intellectual Property and Morality

2021 ◽  
pp. 791-806
Author(s):  
Christine Haight Farley
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
Research Framework ◽  
Law And Morality ◽  
Ip Law

This chapter traces the role of morality in intellectual property (IP) law by outlining the scholarship that addresses what extent, if any, the law does or should reflect moral judgments. Scholars have investigated this question, either explicitly or implicitly, in all of the categories of IP including patent law, trademark law, and copyright law, and to a lesser extent, trade secret law and right of publicity law. In surveying the robust scholarship and diverse perspectives about whether morality has a place in IP law, the chapter reveals an academic dispute surrounding the degree to which law should rely on morality. Some scholars look at IP through the lens of morality; some see only a disconnect between IP law and morality. For some, morality serves as a basis for IP rights, while others find law and morality to be so conceptually distinct as to be irreconcilable. Some see a danger in IP laws being in conflict with morality, while others view the introduction of morality as a danger. The chapter organizes the scholarship by the position it takes on the appropriateness of the juxtaposition of IP and morality while recognizing that the complexity of IP scholars’ relationship to morality is matched only by the complexity of morality itself as a concern of law.

scholarly journals The Patentability of Maori Traditional Medicine and the Morality Exclusion in the Patents Act 1953

2001 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Young
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Traditional Medicine ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
International Obligations

Many indigenous peoples, including Maori, are offended by third parties 'appropriating' their traditional knowledge by means of intellectual property rights, such as patents. The author first surveys international debate about indigenous intellectual property rights in connection with the patenting of traditional indigenous medicine. The author examines the role of morality in New Zealand patent law and how this fits in with New Zealand's international obligations under the World Trade Organisation's TRIPs agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity. The author examines whether the patenting of Maori traditional medicine can be prevented under the morality exclusion in the Patents Act 1953 and outlines five arguments which might be used to justify various levels of intervention in the patenting process in order to protect Maori control over their traditional knowledge.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document