In this media production on Intellectual Property Rights, I will be answering 3 questions. What are Intellectual Property Rights? What form do they take? And finally I’ll be describing the ways in which intellectual property rights inspire and inhibit innovation.
What are intellectual property rights?
Intellectual Property Rights are creations of the mind, items of information or knowledge. They are unlimited copies of this type of information at different locations around the world. Intellectual Property Rights do not necessarily have a physical container. Copyrights limit the duration that someone has ownership over the intellectual property.
What form do Intellectual Property Rights take?
literary & artistic works
symbols, names, images & designs used in commerce
Intellectual Property divided into 2 categories: industrial property and copyright
Intellectual Property rights are divided into 2 categories: industrial property and copyright.
Helen szeto etec 531 intellectual property rights
Intellectual Property RightsBy Helen Szeto ETEC 531 June 2009
symbols, names, images &designs used in commerce
Intellectual Property divided into 2 categories : Industrial Property
Inventions (patents) eª and a QuickTim decompressor TIFF (Unc QuickTimeª and a om essed) (Uncompr see this picture. are needed pressed) decompres to see this so a Tor F and pres s IF needed to picture. r meª com e. are i r TIFF ckT ) de ictu (U Qu Qui ressed this p are n ncomp ickTime p se e om eede resse ª and Unceded to d to d F(TIF are ne see ) decoma this pictupressor re.
COPYRIGHT• Attempted to accommodate cyberspace by merely calling it a conveyance (another format for content of expression)
John Perry Barlow• Protection is something entirely different. How can we protect it?
Treaties• Paris Convention for Protection of Industrial Property in 1883• One of 1st IP treaties (patents)• Paris, France March 20, 1883• Belgium, Brazil, France, Guatemala, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, El Salvador, Serbia, Spain and Switzerland.• 173 members, Aug 2008
Treaties• Berne Convention in 1886• International agreement governing copyright• Berne, Switzerland• 164 members, Sept 2008
Digital Content• Ease in altering or forgery• Ease in rearrangement, construction, recycling• Preventive measures too late• Can’t contain digital data same as analog
Lawrence Lessig• Copyright always @ war with technology• New technology has made copying easier
Postmodern Aesthetic• Encourages electicism & multiplicity over any dominant or ‘original’ style• Accepted practice to appropriate other artists’ works• Originality no longer possible• Artist = processor of info or manipulator of found material
Postmodern Aesthetic• Digital technology = appropriation devices• Scanner• Sampler• Digital data bank plundered
Postmodern Aesthetic• 1980s – New approach to creativity & intellectual property
Andrew Goodwin• Sample & Hold• Sample-based music culture
Walter Benjamin• Distribution of artwork through a network• ‘aura’ of original given way to culture of copying & hands on approach• Collapse of distance
• New era• New criteria of creativity – DJs & musicians assessed not on originality but on skill & judgment in assembling collages of found materials
Problem• New concept of authorship• Law of copyright• Suing musicians & DJs
Solution• Share of royalties (fee)• MACOS --> no legal ramifications• D.I.Y. ---> DJ Spooky ---> Robin Mackay (quotes)
John Perry Barlow• Info is experienced not possessed• Fluidity of info = copyright law outmoded
Shareware & open source software• Collectivist notion VS.• Commitment to intellectual property as commodity• ‘collective intelligence’ by Pierre Levy
Sean Cubist• Sharing of info, sharing of creative process as major social benefit
IP Law• Engaged with new media technologies• Threat to copyright
Walter Benjamin & Timothy Druckery• ‘optical unconscious’• ‘collective vision’• Digital media as form of collage raise issues to do with narrative as culture given
Les Manovich• Cultural ‘transcoding’ – Computers & culture constantly change one another – Speeding up of process
Gregory Ulmer• New aesthetics theorist• gone is Aristotle’s neat, beginning, middle & end• Always in network, in between• Gone are formulas• Choreography --> transitory method• Instead of reading theories, we reinvent instead
• Artists & students become producers as well as consumers of theory• Draw on past & reinvent future• Money as reservoir for creative information
Describe the ways in which IPRs inspireand inhibit innovation.
Inspire• Jefferson designing copyright system – Assuring widespread distribution of thought, not profit – Libraries buy books, rewarding authors • Ideas become available to public
Inspire• U.S. Congress given power to ‘promote’ progress of science…• 1st copyright act (1790) invented to encourage open circulation of knowledge• Provide incentive for artists, scientists & writers to create original works
Inspire• Info ownership = monopoly for publishers• 1793 1st US patent law• Copyrights & patents in theory; legal protection of IP
Inspire• Open source software & Linux – Open knowledge response to software monopolies – No fear of patent infringements – Give users absolute freedom – General Public License GPL
Inspire• Protect stealing from others• Safeguard for consumers• Incentives to creativity• Market creation
Inhibit• Commercialization of IP throughout 19th century undermine original intent• IPR = monopolisitic control, trade secrecy rather than open promotion of science & tech marked corporate practice
Inhibit• Property can be infinitely reproduced & instantaneously distributed w/out cost/knowledge/possession• HOW DO YOU PROTECT IT?
Inhibit• Law protected physical expression• While technology may undo law, technology offers methods for restoring creative rights• Info wants to be free, to change, unconstrained, no final cut
Inhibit• Copyright makes no accommodations whatever for expressions• Patents --> unrestricted monopoly rights• Innovation = process by which knowledge advances
Inhibit• IPRs to protect yesterday’s innovation allow innovator to control future innovation• “anti-commons” --> PATENTS – No justification for restricting access to public domain – Patents increase transaction costs of developing new innovation
Inhibit• Lawrence Lessig – The Future of Ideas
Inhibit• Economists Michele Boldrin & David K. Levine – Perfectly competitive markets capable of rewarding/stimulating innovation – Example: fashion world – Monopoly rights unnecessary for innovation