Intellectual property: Difference between revisions
Pestergaines (talk | contribs) Definition with a ref. |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
In today’s legal systems, IP typically includes at least [[copyright]]s, [[trademark]]s, [[patent]]s, and [[trade secret]]s.<ref name="Kinsella_IP" /> | In today’s legal systems, IP typically includes at least [[copyright]]s, [[trademark]]s, [[patent]]s, and [[trade secret]]s.<ref name="Kinsella_IP" /> | ||
Copyright consists of legal rights over literary, musical, dramatic, or artistic works, such as novels, music, and so on. A concept central to modern IP law is that of the "idea-expression dichotomy"; that a copyright holder has rights not over the ideas per se, but rather in his expression of those ideas. For example, a historian may write a book about the history of the Austrian school, based on a number of historical facts. Another author may use the same facts, but write his own book in his own, different words. There would be no copyright violation. The concept of the idea-expression dichotomy has been criticised by some anti-IP writers. | |||
Although it depends on the medium, such copyright typically lasts for the life of the author plus a number of years- often as much as 70. | |||
Patents are monopoly rights over the use and distribution of inventions. Unlike copyright, which is automatically granted (although some jurisdictions give additional legal rights to registered works), patents must be applied for and approved of. | |||
In a similar vein of thought, a commonly held belief is in a right to one's [[reputation]], and that speech can be restricted if it is [[libel]] or [[slander]].{{Fact}} | In a similar vein of thought, a commonly held belief is in a right to one's [[reputation]], and that speech can be restricted if it is [[libel]] or [[slander]].{{Fact}} | ||
Revision as of 01:41, 8 September 2011
Intellectual property (IP) is a broad concept that covers several types of legally recognized rights arising from some type of intellectual creativity, or that are otherwise related to ideas. IP rights are rights to intangible things—to ideas, as expressed (copyrights), or as embodied in a practical implementation (patents).[1]
Intellectual property laws grant monopolies to originators of ideas, giving them a legal right to initiate force (through the state) against anyone making use of the idea without the permission of the originator of that idea.
Modern libertarians, such as Stephan Kinsella and Jeffrey Tucker, consider the term to be self-contradictory, because ideas and patterns are not scarce or rivalrous, so logically cannot be owned.
Types of intellectual property
In today’s legal systems, IP typically includes at least copyrights, trademarks, patents, and trade secrets.[1] Copyright consists of legal rights over literary, musical, dramatic, or artistic works, such as novels, music, and so on. A concept central to modern IP law is that of the "idea-expression dichotomy"; that a copyright holder has rights not over the ideas per se, but rather in his expression of those ideas. For example, a historian may write a book about the history of the Austrian school, based on a number of historical facts. Another author may use the same facts, but write his own book in his own, different words. There would be no copyright violation. The concept of the idea-expression dichotomy has been criticised by some anti-IP writers. Although it depends on the medium, such copyright typically lasts for the life of the author plus a number of years- often as much as 70.
Patents are monopoly rights over the use and distribution of inventions. Unlike copyright, which is automatically granted (although some jurisdictions give additional legal rights to registered works), patents must be applied for and approved of.
In a similar vein of thought, a commonly held belief is in a right to one's reputation, and that speech can be restricted if it is libel or slander.[citation needed]
History
Patents emerged as a form of protection for mercantiles. Copyrights are rooted in control and censorship of ideas.
Views
Intellectual property is a regularly debated subject among libertarians.
- Stephan Kinsella and Jeffrey Tucker are two of the most prominent strong opponents of all forms of intellectual property.
- Murray Rothbard was opposed to patents, but he believed that a weak form of copyrights could be enforced through contracts.
- Ludwig von Mises and F. A. Hayek were largely opposed to intellectual property.
- Ayn Rand was an enthusiastic supporter of intellectual property.
Arguments against intellectual property
Ethical
Stephan Kinsella's seminal article, Against Intellectual Property outlines the modern libertarian case against all forms of intellectual property.[2] Kinsella's paper focuses on the unethical nature of intellectual property rights. They are always in opposition to real material property rights. They are a straightforward government grant of monopoly to a favored producer.
Utilitarian
Since advocates of intellectual property generally appeal to utilitarianism (that 'nothing will be created' if creators are not granted a monopoly over their creation), Michele Boldrin and David Levine have examined, in their book Against Intellectual Monopoly,[3] the empirical evidence for this claim. They find that, rather than stimulating creativity and innovation, intellectual property laws - especially patent laws - usually inhibit creativity and innovation.
Arguments in favor
According to Murray Rothbard, only activities which are not consonant with the free market would be outlawed by the market. In terms of copyright, when a person writes a work and imprints "copyright" on it, he sells it on condition that the buyer not reproduce the work for sale. By buying the copyrighted work, the buyer implicitly agrees to this condition and is contractually obligated to uphold it. Patents that go beyond this restriction of the copyright contract to prevent people who independently arrive at the same invention from using and selling that invention are punishing an act that is not implicit theft, and hence would not be outlawed by the free market; thus, patents become a state grant of exclusive monopoly privilege, incompatible with the free market. [4]
Ayn Rand argues that, since ideas must originate from the mental effort of an individual (or group of individuals), that originator holds the exclusive property rights to the product(s) of his labor. While one cannot copyright theoretical knowledge - discoveries of facts or truths of reality not previously known - he can claim the right to an invention, the practical application of that knowledge. Since the object that is patented might not have existed without the inventor, and the object copyrighted would not have existed without the creator, the ideas behind such created objects are the property of their originators. [5]
Notes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Stephan Kinsella. Against Intellectual Property, page 9. Referenced 2011-09-07.
- ↑ Against Intellectual Property, Stephan Kinsella
- ↑ Against Intellectual Monopoly, Michele Boldrin and David Levine
- ↑ "Patents and Copyrights," Man, Economy, and State (with Power and Market), 745-754 - [1]
- ↑ “Patents and Copyrights,” Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, 130 - [2]
Links
- Intellectual Property Page resources compiled by Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine
- Writings
- "The Fallacy of Intellectual Property" by Daniel Krawisz, August 2009
- "The Fight against Intellectual Property" by Jacob H. Huebert, 2010
- Other media
- "Ideas Are Free: The Case Against Intellectual Property" lecture by Stephan Kinsella, June 2010 (transcribed as Mises Daily here)