Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 1,241 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 249 - Next  Jump:
2011 - The Law and Society Association Words: 424 words || 
Info
1. George, Alexandra. "When Is Intellectual Property Not "Intellectual Property"?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, Westin St. Francis Hotel, San Francisco, CA, May 30, 2011 <Not Available>. 2019-09-23 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p496369_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Methods of regulating the use of ideational objects such as ideas, information, knowledge and signs have been evolving since time immemorial, yet only some of these methods have developed into modern intellectual property laws. This paper examines doctrines that are similar to intellectual property law in that they too delineate and regulate the use of ideational objects and/or their documented forms but whose objects of regulation are not treated by the law as ‘intellectual property’. It asks whether an explanation for this can be found in intellectual property’s internal structure, or if the explanation lies outside intellectual property law itself.

Contrasting some intellectual property-like doctrines with similar intellectual property laws, this paper analyses typical characteristics of intellectual property doctrines and asks whether these are in fact necessary and/or sufficient to a finding that something is ‘intellectual property’. It calls these characteristics the ‘core criteria’.

The paper suggests that intellectual property-like doctrines that are not treated as intellectual property may be set apart from those typically regarded contemporary intellectual property doctrines because they may not bear all of the core criteria. They may not, for example, require a documented form or originality before regulating an ideational object. Or they may not have an identifiable author or associated rights. Such cases would support a conclusion that the core criteria offer a reliable definition of ‘intellectual property’.

However, where intellectual property-like doctrines do display versions of these core criteria, despite not being regarded as doctrines of ‘intellectual property’ law, a new explanation must be sought. Some of these intellectual property-like doctrines are customs, traditions, commercial practices, lores and laws that regulated the use of ideational objects prior to the development of intellectual property laws per se. Others operate alongside contemporary intellectual property laws and can be credited as intellectual property’s extended family. This begs the question: ‘why are these regulations not treated as “intellectual property”?’ Is it because the core criteria are also typical of non-intellectual property doctrines? Or does it suggest that something beyond the internal structural characteristics identified earlier may help to identify a law as ‘intellectual property’.

This paper concludes that the presence of political will, particularly when supported by normative justifications, creates conditions in which a regulatory doctrine is likely to be transformed into a doctrine within intellectual property law. The answer to whether or not something will be considered to be ‘intellectual property’ thus depends not only on the nature of that thing, and on the content and structure of existing intellectual property laws, but also on the political environment in which the rules operate.

2012 - The Law and Society Association Words: 516 words || 
Info
2. Fisk, Catherine. "Intellectual Property without Law or Property: Attribution in Advertising and Screen Credit" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, Hilton Hawaiian Village Resort, Honolulu, HI, Jun 03, 2012 <Not Available>. 2019-09-23 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p559059_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Intellectual property scholarship, following the pattern of contemporary intellectual property law, generally addresses the use and control of the IP. The cast of characters are usually owners and users. These characters are sometimes portrayed by people (especially users and occasionally creators) but often by entities. Owners are usually corporate entities. Depending on the type of IP at issue (patent, copyright, or trademark), many users are entities too. On the books, IP law pays relatively little attention to the relationships between and among employee-creators and the corporate owners of the IP, but in action these relationships are crucial. A law & society approach to IP uncover the labor of creation behind the veil of corporate ownership, reminding us that creators are people and that conditions under which they create are crucial to the nature of IP and the justice of the regime of its ownership and use. The methods of labor history are particularly well-suited to this process.
This paper uses examples from the twentieth century advertising and motion picture industries to explore the labor history consequences of corporate ownership and control of IP. Hollywood and Madison Avenue in the 1940s and 1950s valued and attributed creativity but adopted contrasting practices about it. Both industries were in transition away from being dominated by vertically-integrated, pyramidally structured, and bureaucratically managed corporations. Men and women in both industries made a great deal of money writing. Writers in Hollywood, unlike writers on Madison Avenue, belonged to a labor union, and they were pretty militant unionists. Their union, the Writers Guild of America, created the screen credit system. Film and TV writing is unique in American letters in having a worker-controlled process for deciding the meaning of authorship and for compensating workers based on the union’s own credit determinations. In advertising, by contrast, there were no unions. There was also no formal system of attribution. And that was no accident.
The interdisciplinary methodological innovation of this paper is the notion that IP history reimagined as labor history allows us to reimagine the possibilities of legal history. Law and society scholarship has long been dominated by the conventional conjunction/disjunction suggested by “and.” Building on new theories of the nature of legal historical scholarship, this chapter dispenses with the conjunctive metaphor in imagining the relationship between IP law and society. Instead of parsing relations between distinct domains of activity, between law and what lies ‘outside’ it, the objective of legal historical research might be to imagine them as the same domain: what do we get if we imagine law and economy as the same phenomenon – that is, law as economy (or economy as law)? In this essay, I take up this methodological challenge and try to imagine intellectual property (law) as labor. My claim is this: the history of IP is most interesting as a history of the labor relations of IP creation. In other words, the legal history of IP should be told as its labor law history.

2004 - American Sociological Association Words: 170 words || 
Info
3. Patel, Rajeev. and Torres, Robert. "Poverty Justifies Intellectual Property - Representations of Development and the Case for Intellectual Property in Agriculture" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Hilton San Francisco & Renaissance Parc 55 Hotel, San Francisco, CA,, Aug 14, 2004 <Not Available>. 2019-09-23 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p110494_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Although the effects of global intellectual property (IP) regimes have their most profound effects in the third world, decisions over these regimes are fixed in the first world. The debates preceding these decisions are contested by advocates and critics of IP alike, and both sides mobilize representations of development to buttress their cases. Comparing public discourse over IP regimes in agriculture provides an insight into the political economy not only of the agricultural industry, but also of the transnational representation of development. We examine the debates over genetically modified (GM) seeds in the U.S. and Europe, noting how third world bodies are mobilized, and how discourses of poverty are used to justify or criticize the promotion of GM seeds. By noting that the pesticide industry is the principal advocate of IP in agriculture, we are able to cast contemporary debates over IP into a longer history of intervention in, and representation of, the third world in attempts to secure hegemony over visions of sustainable agriculture, in developing countries and developed.

2010 - 4S Annual Meeting - Abstract and Session Submissions Words: 257 words || 
Info
4. Sunder Rajan, Kaushik. "“Property Rights, or Property versus Rights? : Questions in the Constitution of Contemporary Indian Biomedicine”" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 4S Annual Meeting - Abstract and Session Submissions, Komaba I Campus, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, <Not Available>. 2019-09-23 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p422635_index.html>
Publication Type: Abstract
Abstract: In this paper, I explore the problematic of “Reframing Rights” through the question of property, specifically intellectual property, in contemporary Indian biomedicine. I am interested in two articulations of rights in relation to property. The first is in the valorization of property itself in terms of rights, as seen in the current aggressive push on the part of the Indian government both to comply with WTO-mandated property regimes and to legislatively reorient the conduct of Indian science in a manner that is more conducive to the generation of intellectual property rights. The second is an opposition of property to other kinds of rights (such as right to health or right to life), which is emerging as an important form of political and legal response to property regimes in India.

The co-production of global biomedicine with global political economy brings into being forms of what Sheila Jasanoff has referred to in her Introduction to the forthcoming volume Reframing Rights as “bio-constitutionalism”. I wish in this paper to conceptually and empirically unpack an instance of the operation of bio-constitutionalism. Conceptually, I am interested in asking how the notion of “right” comes to be at stake and potentially refigured, when it becomes an instrument that both instantiates and negates property. Empirically, I am interested in the institutional forms and political discourses, ideologies and actions that are mobilized at a moment when the very value systems of science, healthcare, the state, law and advocacy are simultaneously being reframed because of new developments in the life sciences and new multilateral trade arrangements.

2011 - Eighteenth International Conference of the Council for European Studies Words: 249 words || 
Info
5. Kuyucu, Tuna. "Urban Transformation’ as State-Led Property Transfer: The Contradictions of Redefining Property in Istanbul’s Informal Housing Areas" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eighteenth International Conference of the Council for European Studies, Various University Venues, Barcelona, Spain, <Not Available>. 2019-09-23 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p493131_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Since 2002, the regulation of urban land/housing markets in Turkey have changed significantly. With the passage of crucial laws, the ‘populist’ mode of urbanization based on the incomplete commodification of land/housing has given way to a neo-liberal mode that no longer relies on informal markets. These new laws have accomplished two goals: The imposition of a fully capitalist property regime on ‘informal’ areas and the creation of a formal housing market for lower-middle classes in place of the gecekondu (informal housing). Through the implementation of ‘urban transformation projects’ (UTP), municipalities are now authorized to transfer ‘gecekondu’ residents into formal units built by the state and upgrade the area physically in order to attract capitalist investments. This paper argues that the construction of a neoliberal market and the imposition of a strict private property regime on informal areas are shaped by the highly ambiguous and exploitative rules that developed in the previous ‘populist’ regime of governance. As such, this neoliberal regime ends up intensifying existing inequalities among gecekondu dwellers. Moreover, the ambiguities, contradictions and malpractices that surround the construction of the new regime generate further dispossession and displacement for the poor whose ‘property’ is transferred to stronger urban actors. Field research I conducted in two ‘transformation’ areas of Istanbul demonstrates that in the absence of ‘social’ policies that accompany these authoritarian and anti-democratic interventions into informal areas, there is a serious risk of increased urban inequality and the geographical re-location of poverty in more marginal parts of the city.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 249 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy