Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Defining “Intellectual Property”
Old 11-13-2018, 12:31 PM   #1
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 457
Defining “Intellectual Property”

I found this article interesting. There are many industries and perspectives represented here in the ER community (and some really smart people) so thought I’d bring this up for discussion.

“He has argued that the term ‘intellectual property’ be discarded in favour of the precise and directed use of ‘copyright’, ‘patents’, ‘trademarks’ or ‘trade secrets’ instead – and he’s right. This is not merely semantic quibbling. The language in which a political and cultural debate is conducted very often determines its outcome.”

https://aeon.co/essays/the-idea-of-i...and-pernicious
__________________

__________________
Wisdom starts with wonder
KCGeezer is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 11-13-2018, 03:51 PM   #2
Moderator
MBAustin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,148
Interesting article, although to be honest I don't care enough about the topic to have read it thoroughly. I do think that laws related to all of these areas need major overhaul, such as was recently accomplished with music rights in the USA as outlined in this article: https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/10/...sing-streaming
__________________

__________________
"One of the funny things about the stock market is that every time one person buys, another sells, and both think they are astute." William Feather
----------------------------------
ER'd Oct. 2010 at 53. Life is good.
MBAustin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2018, 04:24 PM   #3
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,599
Quote:
Glib talk of ‘intellectual property rights’ ... concedes polemical ground to the monopoly rent-extractor by granting a certain perceived virtue to those who hold licences and rights. The rest of us are merely greedy and grasping grubbers for someone else’s property. But in so conceiving the domain of ‘intellectual property rights’, the notions of borrowing, reuse, reworking, remixing and constructive enhancement – all of which are needed for culture and science and art to grow – are lost in the semantic mire created by ‘property’. Things that are owned in the exclusionary way that the indiscriminate use of ‘intellectual property’ suggests cannot sustain art and science and culture.
The US constitution gives Congress the power "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

I see this as a trade-off, the gov't will give you a limited time monopoly on the use of your new ___ , because we think that will produce some sort of economic "progress". But, making such laws means weighing the benefit to the public of the monopoly vs. the benefit to putting a cap on that monopoly.

The author makes the excellent point that trademark protection is fundamentally different from copyrights. We should be careful about lumping them together.

"Intellectual Property" sounds like some inalienable right which precedes any law. That doesn't seem right to me.

This is interesting today because I've noticed a few articles on "Mickey Mouse's 90th birthday", which reminds me of the Mickey Mouse Protection Act of 1998
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyri..._Extension_Act

or the Disney shareholder enrichment act, if you prefer.
Independent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2018, 04:34 PM   #4
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,252
IP is a collective term encompassing patents, copyrights, et al.

An idea submitted to an megacorp IP lawyer still gets sorted into a patent, a copyright, or whatever is appropriate based on the situation. There is no such thing as an "intellectual property license".

Its the same as the cliche "you'll be hearing from my lawyer"... people know what it means. People don't say "you'll be hearing from my estate lawyer" vs. "you'll be hearing from my DUI lawyer"
Or "I'm going to the store to buy milk" vs. "I'm going to the store to by 2% milk". The differences do matter, but not in the everyday use of the term.
Spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2018, 08:26 PM   #5
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Huntsville, AL/Helen, GA
Posts: 4,086
Intellectual Property is what Elvis Presley Enterprises took to higher levels. Using Elvis' likeness, music or interviews came at a healthy price, and those that Priscilla chose to run Elvis' estate were very good at collecting on IP. His likeness ended up bringing in far more money than Elvis ever made as an entertainer. And he wasn't around to spend all his income.

The same could be said for Martin Luther King Jr.'s estate. Use one of his speeches in public, post his picture or a speech, and you had to pay big money. His wife and children really lived the high life.
Bamaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2018, 12:55 PM   #6
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: claremont
Posts: 188
There are many good arguments that the patent system is doing the exact opposite of its stated intention of promoting invention; ie that creating rights around a centralized documentation and release process is counterproductive. The Wright brothers are an early bad example of how patent litigation suppressed innovation in aircraft design in the US.
I prefer reducing the protected term for inventions, and especially for copyright, to limit the famous Disney and Elvis profiteering.
__________________

indiajust is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Defining Rich in America candrew FIRE and Money 110 09-16-2014 05:54 PM
Defining Financial Independence (FI) David1961 FIRE and Money 33 08-11-2013 11:04 PM
Do you lack intellectual stimulation after retirement? JustCurious Life after FIRE 58 04-12-2007 05:10 AM
Intellectual Rights Etc. TromboneAl Other topics 10 01-11-2007 11:06 AM
Defining legal residence? farmerEd Other topics 14 02-18-2006 09:57 AM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:14 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
×