All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Robin Hoods or thieves? A Foucauldian analysis of international trade policies regarding software piracy
Unformatted Document Text:  Foucauldian analysis of international trade policies 24 Trade Association, as examples) that often create additional distractions from multilateral trading groups and issues. Finally, with respect to this point, shift(s) from ITO to WTO to TRO indicate problems with each of the systems, and, consequently, these changes in administrative/regulatory structure produce little progress in practical (i.e., meeting the goals set) terms, to either companies or countries. Second, with respect to U.S. policy, the dialectic between expanding commerce and protecting commerce [i.e., depriving, see below, p. ??)] is perhaps most influential. A duality appears. On the one hand, at least theoretically, some kind of “damage” occurs to the companies that develop the software, and the opinion, among the USTR and Microsoft, at least, is that these companies should be “protected.” On the other hand, if developing countries adopt the technology, this future (and to some extent, present) market is of obvious (though less immediate) benefit to the companies involved. It would appear that to label the adoption (and entrenchment) of software technologies and products in new cultures and countries as “piracy” is a short-sighted view. By utilizing Foucault’s questions (see table, p. 34, herein, especially category one questions) about how discourse forms objects, we can perhaps deconstruct the labels “pirates,” “piracy,” and even “theft.” Activities such as these are not in fact against local laws in places where they occur, for example. But in a broader way of analysis, what if these activities and the people involved in them were termed “developing markets,” “prospective” or “future customers,” or, rather than theft, activities were labeled “innovation adoption?” These latter suggestions may be more accurate terms, both in economic and legal terms. After all, companies may benefit at least two ways when their

Authors: Malyshev, Yuri. and Hamilton, Ann.
first   previous   Page 24 of 34   next   last



background image
Foucauldian analysis of international trade policies 24
Trade Association, as examples) that often create additional distractions from multilateral
trading groups and issues. Finally, with respect to this point, shift(s) from ITO to WTO to
TRO indicate problems with each of the systems, and, consequently, these changes in
administrative/regulatory structure produce little progress in practical (i.e., meeting the
goals set) terms, to either companies or countries.
Second, with respect to U.S. policy, the dialectic between expanding commerce and
protecting commerce [i.e., depriving, see below, p. ??)] is perhaps most influential. A
duality appears. On the one hand, at least theoretically, some kind of “damage” occurs to
the companies that develop the software, and the opinion, among the USTR and Microsoft,
at least, is that these companies should be “protected.” On the other hand, if developing
countries adopt the technology, this future (and to some extent, present) market is of
obvious (though less immediate) benefit to the companies involved. It would appear that to
label the adoption (and entrenchment) of software technologies and products in new
cultures and countries as “piracy” is a short-sighted view.
By utilizing Foucault’s questions (see table, p. 34, herein, especially category one
questions) about how discourse forms objects, we can perhaps deconstruct the labels
“pirates,” “piracy,” and even “theft.” Activities such as these are not in fact against local
laws in places where they occur, for example. But in a broader way of analysis, what if
these activities and the people involved in them were termed “developing markets,”
“prospective” or “future customers,” or, rather than theft, activities were labeled
“innovation adoption?” These latter suggestions may be more accurate terms, both in
economic and legal terms. After all, companies may benefit at least two ways when their


Convention
All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 24 of 34   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.