Differences between version 7 and predecessor to the previous major change of IntellectualProperty.
Other diffs: Previous Revision, Previous Author, or view the Annotated Edit History
| Newer page: | version 7 | Last edited on Sunday, March 7, 2004 4:02:18 pm | by JohnMcPherson | Revert |
| Older page: | version 3 | Last edited on Sunday, March 7, 2004 11:11:26 am | by AristotlePagaltzis | Revert |
@@ -1,3 +1,21 @@
-[
IntellectualProperty]
is an oxymoron
. It
is the legal concept asserting that ideas can be owned, manifested
in various ways such as CopyRight and
[Patent] laws
.
+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:
-The [GPL
] is a response
to the increasing claims
to ownership
of ideas
.
+* Literary, artistic and scientific works;
+* Performances of performing artists, sound recordings and broadcasts;
+* Inventions in all fields of human endeavour;
+* Scientific discoveries;
+* Industrial designs;
+* 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.
+
+There is a lot of debate currently about whether this premise (that the benefits outway the costs) is true, especially in the case of SoftwarePatents. See http://swpat.ffii.org/ for information about SoftwarePatents 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.
+
+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
.
+
+
+!! More Information
+*See http://cnx.rice.edu/content/m11795/latest/ for a brief background on US [IntellectualProperty] law.
+*See http://www.med.govt.nz/buslt/int_prop/info-sheets/index.html for information on [IntellectualProperty] law in NewZealand
