Intellectual Property Law has grown grown considerably, due in part to the parellel growth in international trade. The intellectual property law, which...
The accessibility of patented medicines in developing countries has become a widely discussed subject in intellectual property law over the past 10...
Himma points out that, by itself, the claim that consumption ofinformation is non-rivalrous does not imply that we have a right of anykind to those objects. While this certainly provides a reasonagainst thinking protection of intellectual property is morallyjustified, it does not tell us anything about whether we have a rightof some sort because it does not contain any information about morallyrelevant properties of human beings—and the justification ofgeneral rights-claims necessarily rests on attributions of value thatimplicitly respond to interests of beings with the appropriate level ofmoral standing—in our case, our status as persons (Himma2005).
Critics argue that information is not the kind of thing that can beowned or possessed and is not something that can be property, as thatnotion is typically defined. Information objects, such as numbers andpropositions are abstract objects, which cannot causally interact withmaterial objects, and hence cannot be owned or possessed. The idea,for example, that one could, in the relevant sense, possess and henceown the novel expressed by the book A Tale of Two Citiesmakes as little sense as the idea that one could possess and hence ownthe entity denoted by the symbol “2.” Whatever conceptsmight properly be applied to abstract objects, on this view, theconcept of property, according to these theorists, does not. As aconceptual matter, the term “intellectual property,” atbest, applies to nothing and, at worst, is incoherent.
Putting aside the strands of argument that seek to justify moralclaims to intangible works and the rather focused problems with theseviews, there are several general critiques of the rights to controlintellectual property to consider.
As a modern workaround for the first sale rule, many online contentproviders, rather than selling a copy of a work, simply offer licensingagreements (through click-wrap, shrink-wrap, etc.) that allow onlyspecific uses of protected content. These approaches to protectingintellectual works are relatively new and seemingly build upon thecopyright systems already in place. For example, by usinglicensing agreements to guarantee different levels of downstreamaccess, the Creative Commons and Copyleft models seek to expand thecommons of thought and expression (Stallman 1997; Lessig 2004).An owner may allow others to build upon a protected work provided thatthe “new” work is similarly accessible or usable.
In the landmark English case Miller v. Taylor (1769), the inherentrights of authors to control what they produce, independent of statuteor law, was affirmed. While this case was later overruled inDonaldson v. Becket (1774), the practice of recognizing therights of authors had begun. Other European countries, includingBelgium, Holland, Italy, and Switzerland, followed the example set byEngland (Bugbee, 1967). Various more recent internationaltreaties like the Berne Convention treaty and the TRIPS agreement haveexpanded the geographic scope of intellectual property protection toinclude most of the globe (Moore 2001).
The domain or subject matter of patent law is the invention anddiscovery of new and useful processes, machines, articles ofmanufacture, or compositions of matter. There are three types ofpatents recognized by patent law: utility patents, design patents, andplant patents. Utility patents protect any new, useful, and nonobviousprocess, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, aswell as any new and useful improvement thereof. Design patents protectany new, original, and ornamental design for an article ofmanufacture. Finally, the subject matter of a plant patent is any newvariety of plant. Patent protection is the strongest form ofintellectual property protection, in that a twenty-year exclusivemonopoly is granted to the owner over any expression or implementationof the protected work (35 U.S.C. §101 (1988) and 35U.S.C. §154(a)(2)).
The Society has been established as an association of people who work with intellectual property laws (lawyers, patent attorneys, licensing managers and academics) and those who are users of these laws. It provides a unique forum in which to meet and discuss current problems and developments in this fascinating and rapidly expanding area.
Among them, Taiwan has been singled out as one of the worst offenders in the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) violation. The following statistics shows that the piracy rate in Taiwan is not very high compared to Korea and China.
Intellectual property rights underpin much of the investment of time, money and resources that is expended in the process of innovation in our society. Through the laws of patents, copyright, designs, trade marks, unfair competition and trade secrets, protection is given to those who create, develop and market new concepts and ideas across a vast range of industries and occupations.
Intellectual property rights has a significant value to both individuals and businesses, providing in the case of large companies, over one half of their value on return....