000042154 000__ 02993cam\a22002535i\4500
000042154 001__ 42154
000042154 003__ SzGeWIPO
000042154 005__ 20240708145902.0
000042154 008__ 200702s2010\\\\sz\\\\\\r\\\\\000\0\eng\d
000042154 040__ $$aSzGeWIPO$$beng$$erda
000042154 041__ $$aeng
000042154 1001_ $$aDreyfuss, Rochelle Cooper
000042154 24503 $$aDoes IP Need IP?$$bAccommodating Intellectual Production Outside the Intellectual Property Paradigm
000042154 264_1 $$a[New York City, New York] :$$b[Yeshiva University],$$c2010.
000042154 300__ $$a38 pages
000042154 336__ $$atext$$btxt$$2rdacontent
000042154 337__ $$aunmediated$$bn$$2rdamedia
000042154 338__ $$avolume$$bnc$$2rdacarrier
000042154 520__ $$aArguments for strong intellectual property protection proceed on the assumption that exclusive rights are necessary to generate the incentives that encourage intellectual production. However, recent events suggest that that this assumption is questionable. Many creative endeavors are flourishing without strong intellectual property protection. Examples include fashion, stand-up comedy, magic, cuisine, and software (consider Linux, Apache, Firefox). Academic research has long been conducted under a sharing regime, and even after the Bayh-Dole Act permitted universities to claim patent rights in faculty inventions, the Mertonian norm of communalism continues to exert a strong influence over academic practices. And as Eric von Hippel has amply demonstrated, users generate and share the fruits of their creativity in contexts as varied as extreme sports, surgery, library science, and commercial high-tech manufacturing. Now that the existence of these robust forms of production has been recognized, it is tempting to argue that traditional intellectual property rights should be abolished. At the same time, however, there may be limits to creative production outside the intellectual property paradigm. Ostensibly open systems are sometimes functionally dependent on copyright, patent, trademark, or trade secrecy law. The operation of these systems can also be highly contingent – sometimes on the innovative industry at issue or the technological infrastructure supporting it; sometimes on the sensibilities of particular individuals. Much of the theoretical work treats the education of creative workers as exogenous to the problem of innovation, but the calculus can vary once the need to motivate the acquisition of human capital is taken into account. There are also normative problems: Open innovation may be nonoptimal, it may lead to undesirable strategies for maintaining a competitive advantage, and it can be exploitative of knowledge workers. This paper therefore starts from the proposition that intellectual property rights will not soon disappear. It is intended to contribute to a new conversation on how intellectual property law ought to change in order to accommodate and sustain what Mario Biagioli has termed IP without IP (Intellectual Production without Intellectual Property).
000042154 525__ $$aPublished in : Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 31, No. 5, 2010
000042154 605_0 $$aIntellectual property
000042154 650_0 $$aUser innovation
000042154 650_0 $$aPatent
000042154 650_0 $$aCopyright
000042154 85641 $$uhttps://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1639590##$$yView this resource
000042154 904__ $$aJournal article
000042154 980__ $$aBIB