Dissolving Intellectual Property
| Autor | Paul Geller |
| Páginas | 49-58 |
49
Anuario Andino de Derechos Intelectuales.
Año VI - N.º 6. Lima, 2010
Dissolving Intellectual Property
PAUL EDWARD GELLER*
Summary: I. Crystallization. II. Dissolution. 2.1. Holders. 2.2. Subject Matters. 2.3. Structuring Boundaries.
III. Lines of Inquiry. 3.1. From Property to Liability. 3.2. Institutional Contexts. IV. Conclusion.
Our theme at this ATRIP meeting is: Intellectual Property bridging aesthetics and
economics. Copyright law evokes aesthetics; patent law, technologies. These laws are
supposed to enhance our aesthetic and technological wealth. [1] They aim at this goal by
attempting to influence the economics of cultural goods.
I shall try to take a long view of this attempt. First, I shall ask: How did the classic
laws of copyright and patents crystallize? Second, I shall argue that the structures of these
laws have been dissolving over time. Third, I shall indicate a few of the many lines of
inquiry that are opening up.
I. CRYSTALLIZATION
As we all know, property calls for boundaries. These indicate who owns what and
where their rights begin and end. A property law may be said to crystallize as it helps us
to draw these boundaries clearly and coherently. How have the classic laws of copyright
and patents come to do this job?
Think back in history. After the fall of the Roman Empire, culture, especially tech-
nology, flowed from Asia into Europe. [2] A critical mass was reached in the Renaissance,
and printing acted as a catalyst. In early modern Europe, publishers and pirates became
hubs for spreading culture, as did scholarly associations and mobile artisans. [3] At the same
time, the Church, the guilds, the State, new enterprises, and individual creators squabbled
over new cultural goods. [4]
Here we face the problem of public goods. It is difficult to exclude others from enjoy-
ing such goods. And, though used by one person, they tend to remain available to others. [5]
For example, once I publish a poem, others can enjoy the poem again and again. Progress
in the media, notably in information processing, can facilitate sharing cultural goods. [6]
These then approach ideal public goods more closely. We just saw print make texts more
accessible. Open science makes technologies more available. [7]
* Originally published in the John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law (2005). Este artículo se
reproduce con expresa autorización del autor.
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba