{"id":18,"date":"2014-12-04T22:48:34","date_gmt":"2014-12-04T22:48:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/chapter\/the-why-of-intellectual-property\/"},"modified":"2019-11-06T21:33:16","modified_gmt":"2019-11-06T21:33:16","slug":"the-why-of-intellectual-property","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/chapter\/the-why-of-intellectual-property\/","title":{"raw":"James Boyle, &#8220;The Why of Intellectual Property&#8221;","rendered":"James Boyle, &#8220;The Why of Intellectual Property&#8221;"},"content":{"raw":"Read\u00a0the article at\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/thepublicdomain.org\/thepublicdomain1.pdf\">http:\/\/thepublicdomain.org\/thepublicdomain1.pdf<\/a>\n\n<b>Background<\/b>\n\nUnderstanding why the idea of\u00a0\"intellectual property\" exists is a critical first step\u00a0on the way to\u00a0understanding the open education movement. \u00a0James Boyle\u2019s book, The Public Domain,\u00a0provides an excellent starting point for developing this understanding.\n\nJames Boyle is one of the founding board members and former board chairman of Creative Commons, the most commonly accepted and popular form of open licenses used in the world, which are discussed\u00a0later in this book. \u00a0As one of the key members of the modern movement to change the way intellectual property is protected and distributed, Boyle's views on the subject are fundamental to understanding the societal context of other historically significant developments like the introduction of the free\/libre copyright by Richard Stallman, which will also be included in later readings. \u00a0By understanding these articles, the stage is set for understanding the movements of open education for the past 50 years. The incredible progress of technology has dramatically changed choices society can make regarding intellectual property, but it is important to understand the theory, the history, and the reality of intellectual property if society hopes to make changes that actually lead to progress and truly impactful education.\n\n<strong>Key Points<\/strong>\n\nThis first chapter provides an introduction to the history of intellectual property concepts. It also explores what property is, what it is not, and why that matters.\n\nIn this chapter, Boyle focuses on the economic theory that created intellectual property. \u00a0He starts by explaining that since the early days of western civilization, clearly defined and protected property rights have been critical to societal progress. Citizens with property rights could spend time in education, scientific pursuits, and money-generating activities without having to spend a majority of their time sharpening their swords to ward off thieves who came to plunder the profits from those educational, scientific, or money-generating pursuits. With good property rights and good government, societies could focus on productive activities instead of spiraling into anarchy. \u00a0Key points about property:\n<ul>\n\t<li>It is\u00a0generally \u201crivalrous,\u201d meaning that it can\u00a0not be used by more than one person at a time, so stealing is taking away another\u2019s opportunity to use the material.<\/li>\n\t<li>Well-protected property rights incentivize individuals to produce by helping them capture the future benefits produced by their creation.<\/li>\n\t<li>Property rights are especially needed to incentivize individuals when the good they are creating is very expensive to produce and very cheap to reproduce (such as medicine.) Without property rights, the individual would bear all the costs of research necessary to achieve first production but lose future benefits to copycats who reproduce without any initial investment. If this situation prevailed,\u00a0inventors would be disincentivized from creating in the first place and society overall would suffer.<\/li>\n\t<li>The system of property rights in place to create the former incentives are patents, trademarks, and copyrights.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nWhile the theory of \u201cintellectual property rights\u201d is very useful to society, Boyle shows how the application of these protections has become warped and questions their application in the\u00a0online space. \u00a0Boyle delves into the following key points about the detrimental effect of misapplied intellectual property regimes:\n<ul>\n\t<li>Currently in America, corporate copyrights are protected for\u00a095 years and personal rights are life plus 70 years.<\/li>\n\t<li>Current copyrights and patents long outlast their purpose of incentivizing creation of society-benefiting works. \u00a0By extending IP rights to decades after the creation of the work and death of the author, IP actually limits the influence of the creation by restricting reuse, remixing, remaking, or redistribution of works.<\/li>\n\t<li>The current policy of instantaneous copyright creates a cultural dead ground by preventing artists or publishers (other producing entities) from using contemporary works even if the artist is dead or doesn\u2019t care.<\/li>\n\t<li>Patents are only supposed to be given for inventions that were novel, nonobvious, and useful. Many current patents don\u2019t meet those\u00a0criteria.<\/li>\n\t<li>There are some fundamental differences between ideas and physical property that should change the way we view \u201cintellectual property.\u201d In many ways ideas and digital creations are non-rivalrous, which means that taking from a producer like downloading a movie from Disney doesn\u2019t reduce the supply available to\u00a0Disney at all. \u00a0The non-rivalrous nature of digital materials should change the way some laws are structured and applied.<\/li>\n\t<li>The internet makes many goods behave more like public goods than private goods.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<strong>Discussion Questions<\/strong>\n<ol>\n\t<li>Is it appropriate to use the language of\u00a0tangible\u00a0property\u00a0when referring to ideas and other non-rival goods\u00a0(like property, theft, or piracy)? What are the similarities? \u00a0What are the differences? \u00a0How should they\u00a0affect intellectual property law?<\/li>\n\t<li>In what ways is an idea rivalrous? In what ways is it not?<\/li>\n\t<li>What are other systems or IP systems that can incentivize creation that avoid the former problems?<\/li>\n\t<li>What is the optimal length of a copyright?<\/li>\n\t<li>How can we balance the personal benefit of the creator of the work with the benefit of the public good?<\/li>\n\t<li>What measures are currently being taken legislatively to reduce copyright restrictions?<\/li>\n\t<li>Who are the stakeholders lobbying for longer copyrights?<\/li>\n\t<li>What are competing incentives to create? Volunteer? Compulsion to create?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<strong>Additional Resources<\/strong>\n\nWikipedia articles for \u201cPublic Goods,\u201d \u201cPrivate Goods,\u201d \u201cBerne Convention,\u201d \u00a0\u201cWIPO\u201d","rendered":"<p>Read\u00a0the article at\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/thepublicdomain.org\/thepublicdomain1.pdf\">http:\/\/thepublicdomain.org\/thepublicdomain1.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n<p><b>Background<\/b><\/p>\n<p>Understanding why the idea of\u00a0&#8220;intellectual property&#8221; exists is a critical first step\u00a0on the way to\u00a0understanding the open education movement. \u00a0James Boyle\u2019s book, The Public Domain,\u00a0provides an excellent starting point for developing this understanding.<\/p>\n<p>James Boyle is one of the founding board members and former board chairman of Creative Commons, the most commonly accepted and popular form of open licenses used in the world, which are discussed\u00a0later in this book. \u00a0As one of the key members of the modern movement to change the way intellectual property is protected and distributed, Boyle&#8217;s views on the subject are fundamental to understanding the societal context of other historically significant developments like the introduction of the free\/libre copyright by Richard Stallman, which will also be included in later readings. \u00a0By understanding these articles, the stage is set for understanding the movements of open education for the past 50 years. The incredible progress of technology has dramatically changed choices society can make regarding intellectual property, but it is important to understand the theory, the history, and the reality of intellectual property if society hopes to make changes that actually lead to progress and truly impactful education.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Key Points<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>This first chapter provides an introduction to the history of intellectual property concepts. It also explores what property is, what it is not, and why that matters.<\/p>\n<p>In this chapter, Boyle focuses on the economic theory that created intellectual property. \u00a0He starts by explaining that since the early days of western civilization, clearly defined and protected property rights have been critical to societal progress. Citizens with property rights could spend time in education, scientific pursuits, and money-generating activities without having to spend a majority of their time sharpening their swords to ward off thieves who came to plunder the profits from those educational, scientific, or money-generating pursuits. With good property rights and good government, societies could focus on productive activities instead of spiraling into anarchy. \u00a0Key points about property:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>It is\u00a0generally \u201crivalrous,\u201d meaning that it can\u00a0not be used by more than one person at a time, so stealing is taking away another\u2019s opportunity to use the material.<\/li>\n<li>Well-protected property rights incentivize individuals to produce by helping them capture the future benefits produced by their creation.<\/li>\n<li>Property rights are especially needed to incentivize individuals when the good they are creating is very expensive to produce and very cheap to reproduce (such as medicine.) Without property rights, the individual would bear all the costs of research necessary to achieve first production but lose future benefits to copycats who reproduce without any initial investment. If this situation prevailed,\u00a0inventors would be disincentivized from creating in the first place and society overall would suffer.<\/li>\n<li>The system of property rights in place to create the former incentives are patents, trademarks, and copyrights.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>While the theory of \u201cintellectual property rights\u201d is very useful to society, Boyle shows how the application of these protections has become warped and questions their application in the\u00a0online space. \u00a0Boyle delves into the following key points about the detrimental effect of misapplied intellectual property regimes:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Currently in America, corporate copyrights are protected for\u00a095 years and personal rights are life plus 70 years.<\/li>\n<li>Current copyrights and patents long outlast their purpose of incentivizing creation of society-benefiting works. \u00a0By extending IP rights to decades after the creation of the work and death of the author, IP actually limits the influence of the creation by restricting reuse, remixing, remaking, or redistribution of works.<\/li>\n<li>The current policy of instantaneous copyright creates a cultural dead ground by preventing artists or publishers (other producing entities) from using contemporary works even if the artist is dead or doesn\u2019t care.<\/li>\n<li>Patents are only supposed to be given for inventions that were novel, nonobvious, and useful. Many current patents don\u2019t meet those\u00a0criteria.<\/li>\n<li>There are some fundamental differences between ideas and physical property that should change the way we view \u201cintellectual property.\u201d In many ways ideas and digital creations are non-rivalrous, which means that taking from a producer like downloading a movie from Disney doesn\u2019t reduce the supply available to\u00a0Disney at all. \u00a0The non-rivalrous nature of digital materials should change the way some laws are structured and applied.<\/li>\n<li>The internet makes many goods behave more like public goods than private goods.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Discussion Questions<\/strong><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Is it appropriate to use the language of\u00a0tangible\u00a0property\u00a0when referring to ideas and other non-rival goods\u00a0(like property, theft, or piracy)? What are the similarities? \u00a0What are the differences? \u00a0How should they\u00a0affect intellectual property law?<\/li>\n<li>In what ways is an idea rivalrous? In what ways is it not?<\/li>\n<li>What are other systems or IP systems that can incentivize creation that avoid the former problems?<\/li>\n<li>What is the optimal length of a copyright?<\/li>\n<li>How can we balance the personal benefit of the creator of the work with the benefit of the public good?<\/li>\n<li>What measures are currently being taken legislatively to reduce copyright restrictions?<\/li>\n<li>Who are the stakeholders lobbying for longer copyrights?<\/li>\n<li>What are competing incentives to create? Volunteer? Compulsion to create?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Additional Resources<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Wikipedia articles for \u201cPublic Goods,\u201d \u201cPrivate Goods,\u201d \u201cBerne Convention,\u201d \u00a0\u201cWIPO\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":14,"menu_order":1,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-18","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":17,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/18","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/14"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/18\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19,"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/18\/revisions\/19"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/17"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/18\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=18"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=18"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/integrations.pressbooks.network\/openedreader\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=18"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}