The American Assembly: Art, Technology, and Intellectual Property

Examines intellectual property issues as the arts sector joins other sectors in the race to deal with an increasingly information-driven economy

Perceptions of Intellectual Property:A Review

In “The right to good ideas: patents and the poor”, The Economist depicts two driving forces in the contemporary discourse on IP and globalization. The one is interested in advancing the knowledge economy, an approach based on the belief that knowledge is the driving factor behind economic growth. The other resides on a belief that IP is a major means to advance the process of globalization. While the former is strongly motivated by new economic growth theory, as for example advanced by Stanford professor Paul Romer, the latter is based on typical anti-globalization arguments, such as for example the position that the IP system helps multinational companies to build up monopolies to the detriment of the poor, drives small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and local business in developing countries out of business and increases prices for consumer products, be they pharmaceuticals or software. The purpose of this review is to help understand the current discourse on intellectual property, to grasp underlying themes, assumptions and connotations associated with the term “IP”, so as to identify paths leading to a more comprehensive understanding of IP and the opportunities and pitfalls it may provide

What\u27s It Worth to Keep a Secret?

This article is the first major study of protection and valuation of trade secrets under federal criminal law. Trade secrecy is more important than ever as an economic complement and substitute for other intellectual property protections, particularly patents. Accordingly, U.S. public policy correctly places a growing emphasis on characterizing the scope of trade secrets, creating incentives for their productive use, and imposing penalties for their theft. Yet amid this complex ecosystem of legal doctrine, economic policy, commercial strategy, and enforcement, there is little research or consensus on how to assign value to trade secrets. One reason for this gap is that intangible assets in general are notoriously difficult to value, and trade secrecy by its opaque nature is ill-suited to the market-signaling mechanisms that offer at least some traction in other forms of valuation. Another reason is that criminal trade secret law is relatively young, and the usual corrective approaches to valuation in civil trade secrecy are not synonymous with the greater distributive concerns of criminal law. To begin to fill this gap, we examine over a decade of trade secret protection and valuation under the U.S. Economic Espionage Act of 1996. From original data on EEA prosecutions, we show that trade secret valuations are lognormally distributed as predicted by Gibrat’s Law, with valuations typically low on the order of $5 million but reaching as high as$250 million. There is no notable difference among estimates from various valuation methods, but a difference between high and low estimates on one hand and the sentencing estimates on the other. These findings suggest that the EEA has not been used to its full capacity, a conclusion buttressed by recent Congressional actions to strengthen the EEA

What's it worth to keep a secret?

This article is the first major study of protection and valuation of trade secrets under federal criminal law. Trade secrecy is more important than ever as an economic complement and substitute for other intellectual property protections, particularly patents. Accordingly, U.S. public policy correctly places a growing emphasis on characterizing the scope of trade secrets, creating incentives for their productive use, and imposing penalties for their theft. Yet amid this complex ecosystem of legal doctrine, economic policy, commercial strategy, and enforcement, there is little research or consensus on how to assign value to trade secrets. One reason for this gap is that intangible assets in general are notoriously difficult to value, and trade secrecy by its opaque nature is ill-suited to the market-signaling mechanisms that offer at least some traction in other forms of valuation. Another reason is that criminal trade secret law is relatively young, and the usual corrective approaches to valuation in civil trade secrecy are not synonymous with the greater distributive concerns of criminal law. To begin to fill this gap, we examine over a decade of trade secret protection and valuation under the U.S. Economic Espionage Act of 1996. From original data on EEA prosecutions, we show that trade secret valuations are lognormally distributed as predicted by Gibrat’s Law, with valuations typically low on the order of $5 million but reaching as high as$250 million. There is no notable difference among estimates from various valuation methods, but a difference between high and low estimates on one hand and the sentencing estimates on the other. These findings suggest that the EEA has not been used to its full capacity, a conclusion buttressed by recent Congressional actions to strengthen the EEA

Protection of intellectual property rights an Indian perspective

The objective of this paper is to provide an overview of the Indian Innovation System, IPR system and other related activities such as Judicial System, Enforcement System, and Academic Institutions etc. The paper is based on the existing data and relates those data and results to the India’s Intellectual Property Rights System, Innovation, Research and Development. This paper focus on the recent reforms in IPR laws to achieve a legal framework for protecting IPR that is comparable to that of most developed nations. As a part Information Technology, three major IT organizations focus on innovation and research discussed in addition to an overview about major multinational companies’ research initiatives in India

Law and Policy on Intellectual Property, Traditional Knowledge and Development: Legally Protecting Creativity and Collective Rights in Traditional Knowledge Based Agricultural Products through Geographical Indications

Geographical indications emerged on the international scene at the centre of three highly debated subjects: intellectual property, international trade and agricultural policy. This article discusses the use of geographical indications in the protection of traditional knowledge–based agricultural products in the international intellectual property framework, and assesses the challenges and opportunities geographical indications present with respect to efforts to cater to the needs of indigenous people and local communities. The discussion begins with a succinct overview of the definitional aspects of geographical indications, traditional knowledge and traditional knowledge–based agricultural products. In an attempt to locate the issue of geographical indications in the current intellectual property landscape, the article examines their regulation in international and national legal frameworks, and critically appraises the attendant controversies in international negotiations. The article then broaches issues to do with the link between geographical indications and traditional knowledge, and examines the cultural, economic and environmental issues in policy debates surrounding the applicability of geographical indications to traditional knowledge–based agricultural products.agricultural products, geographical indications, traditional knowledge, TRIPS, WTO, Agricultural and Food Policy, Institutional and Behavioral Economics, International Relations/Trade,

Toward a Human Rights Framework for Intellectual Property

This Article, prepared for a Symposium on Intellectual Property and Social Justice held at the University of California at Davis School of Law in March 2006, addresses the growing intersection of human rights law and intellectual property law. Its principal point of departure is a November 2005 General Comment on the right of everyone to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author - a relatively obscure provision of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Article builds upon the analysis in the General Comment to sketch the tentative outlines of a human rights framework for intellectual property, a framework that offers a distinctive approach for mediating the two fields of law and policy. The Article also analyzes the rapidly changing institutional environment in which states and NGOs are generating new legal rules to govern the interface between human rights and intellectual property. It focuses in particular on three recent treaty-making initiatives in three intergovernmental organizations - UNESCO, WHO, and WIPO. These initiatives include (1) the recently adopted Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, (2) the proposed Medical Research and Development Treaty, and (3) the proposed Access to Knowledge Treaty. Each of these treaty texts draws upon international human rights law in different ways to question existing approaches to intellectual property protection and to revise the mandates of intergovernmental organizations