Differences between version 11 and predecessor to the previous major change of IntellectualProperty.
Other diffs: Previous Revision, Previous Author, or view the Annotated Edit History
| Newer page: | version 11 | Last edited on Monday, October 11, 2004 12:08:56 am | by AristotlePagaltzis | Revert |
| Older page: | version 10 | Last edited on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 7:36:30 am | by AristotlePagaltzis | Revert |
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
-IntellectualProperty (IP)
is a generic term for
the range of property rights accorded for
the protection of creations of the mind
. The term "intellectual property"
is defined
in Article 2 (viii)
of the Convention Establishing
the [World Intellectual Property Organisation|http://www.wipo.org] 1967
as including
rights in relation to:
+IntellectualProperty is an oxymoron:
the legal concept asserting that ideas can be owned. Be aware that there is no actual IntellectualProperty law;
the concept is manifested in various distinct ways such as CopyRight and [Patent] laws
. The term IntellectualProperty
is often abused by MarkeTroid~s to conflate issues spanning multiple kinds of IntellectualProperty law
in order to muddle over all-important details. [SCO]'s [Linux] [FUD] was a particularly egregious example
of the practice. The [FSF] [dislike
the term | http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty] for this reason and suggest focussing on the individual aspects of law such as CopyRight and [Patent]s instead.
+
+The
[World Intellectual Property Organisation | http://www.wipo.org] defined the term
as the range of property
rights accorded for the protection of creations of the mind, including
* Literary, artistic and scientific works;
* Performances of performing artists, sound recordings and broadcasts;
* Inventions in all fields of human endeavour;
@@ -8,13 +10,11 @@
* Trade marks, service marks and commercial names and designations;
* Protection against unfair competition; and
* All other rights resulting from intellectual activity in the industrial, scientific, literary or artistic fields.
-IntellectualProperty rights (IPRs)
provide creators and innovators
with the exclusive right, for a limited time,
to control what others may do with their work. This exclusive right is justified on the grounds that IPRs
give creators and innovators an opportunity to make a return on their investment in creativity or innovation
, and provide
an incentive for creative or innovative activity that might not otherwise take place. The benefits of this additional creativity and innovation are considered to outweigh the costs imposed on society by IPRs.
-
-(that the benefits outway the costs)
is true, especially in
the case of [SoftwarePatent]s
. See http://swpat.ffii.org/ for information about [
SoftwarePatent]
s in Europe. This is an example
of bad implementation of [IntellectualProperty] law, rather than evidence that any [IntellectualProperty] law is bad as some people would have us believe
.
+IntellectualProperty rights provide their owners
with the exclusive right to control what others may do with their work for a limited time
. This exclusive right is supposed to be
justified on the grounds that they
give creators and innovators an opportunity to make a return on their investment, providing
an incentive for creative or innovative activity that might not otherwise take place. There is a lot of debate currently about whether this premise is true in general
, and whether it is true with
the current IntellectualProperty law implementations
. SoftwarePatent~
s are a particular focus point
of the arguments
.
-OpenSource
licenses such as the [GPL] rely on [
IntellectualProperty]
law such as CopyRight to be effective. However
the [FSF] (Creators of the [GPL]) [dislike the term IntellectualProperty| http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty] as it is too broad and carries many negative connotations in todays world. They suggest competely forgetting that you ever heard the words IntellectualProperty and instead focus on the individual aspects of
law such as CopyRight, [Patent]s, etc
.
+CopyLeft
licenses such as the [GPL] are a reaction to the growing trend to claim ownership to ideas. While they
rely on IntellectualProperty law such as CopyRight to be effective, they essentially use
the law against itself
.
See also:
* [Patent]
* SoftwarePatent
@@ -22,8 +22,8 @@
* PublicDomain
* SoftwareLicensing
* GeneralPublicLicense
* [A brief background on US Intellectual Property law | http://cnx.rice.edu/content/m11795/latest/]
-* [Information on Intellectual Property law in NewZealand
| http://www.med.govt.nz/buslt/int_prop/info-sheets/]
+* [Information on Intellectual Property law in New Zealand
| http://www.med.govt.nz/buslt/int_prop/info-sheets/]
----
Part of CategoryLegalese
