Intellectual property rights in a knowledge-based economy

Intellectual property rights (IPR) have been created as economic mechanisms to facilitate ongoing innovation by granting inventors a temporary monopoly in return for disclosure of technical know-how. Since the beginning of 1980s, IPR have come under scrutiny as new technological paradigms appeared with the emergence of knowledge-based industries. Knowledge-based products are intangible, non-excludable and non-rivalrous goods. Consequently, it is difficult for their creators to control their dissemination and use. In particular, many information goods are based on network externalities and on the creation of market standards. At the same time, information technologies are generic in the sense of being useful in many places in the economy. Hence, policy makers often define current IPR regimes in the context of new technologies as both over- and under-protective. They are over-protective in the sense that they prevent the dissemination of information which has a very high social value; they are under-protective in the sense that they do not provide strong control over the appropriation of rents from their invention and thus may not provide strong incentives to innovate. During the 1980s, attempts to assess the role of IPR in the process of technological learning have found that even though firms in high-tech sectors do use patents as part of their strategy for intellectual property protection, the reliance of these sectors on patents as an information source for innovation is lower than in traditional industries. Intellectual property rights are based mainly on patents for technical inventions and on copyrights for artistic works. Patents are granted only if inventions display minimal levels of utility, novelty and non-obviousness of technical know-how. By contrast, copyrights protect only final works and their derivatives, but guarantee protection for longer periods, according to the Berne Convention. Licensing is a legal aid that allows the use of patented technology by other firms, in return for royalty fees paid to the inventor. Licensing can be contracted on an exclusive or non-exclusive basis, but in most countries patented knowledge can be exclusively held by its inventors, as legal provisions for compulsory licensing of technologies do not exist. The fair use doctrine aims to prevent formation of perfect monopolies over technological fields and copyrighted artefacts as a result of IPR application. Hence, the use of patented and copyrighted works is permissible in academic research, education and the development of technologies that are complimentary to core technologies. Trade secrecy is meant to prevent inadvertent technology transfer to rival firms and is based on contracts between companies and employees. However, as trade secrets prohibit transfer of knowledge within industries, regulators have attempted to foster disclosure of technical know-how by institutional means of patents, copyrights and sui-generis laws. And indeed, following the provisions formed by IPR regulation, firms have shifted from methods of trade secrecy towards patenting strategies to achieve improved protection of intellectual property, as well as means to acquire competitive advantages in the market by monopolization of technological advances.economics of technology ;

A study of amniotomy in the bantu, with special reference to elective amniotomy

Click on the link to view

Analisis Dampak Hak Asasi Manusia atas Regulasi: Sebuah Tinjauan Metodologi

Jaminan kesesuaian undang-undang terhadap norma dan prinsip hak asasi manusia secara langsung membutuhkan sebuah mekanisme dan metodologi yang mampu memprediksi (predict) dampak produk legislasi terhadap penikmatan hak asasi manusia (human rights enjoyment) oleh setiap individu atau kelompok masyarakat. Atas dasar pemahaman tersebut, tulisan ini hendak menguraikan sekelumit peluang dan tantangan secara metodologis atas gagasan untuk merumuskan sebuah kerangka kerja analisis dampak hak asasi manusia terhadap naskah rancangan peraturan perundang-undangan. Untuk itu, tulisan ini akan dipilah ke dalam tiga bagian utama yakni: pertama, gambaran umum analisis dampak hak asasi manusia sebagai instrumen teknis dari pendekatan berbasis hak asasi manusia (human rights based approach) yang tengah berkembang sejak dasawarsa terakhir; kedua, peluang untuk meletakkan pendekatan tersebut ke dalam proses pembentukan regulasi (rule making process); dan ketiga, adalah gambaran tentang tantangan metodologis ilmu sosial dalam merumuskan cara kerja analisis dampak hak asasi manusia ke dalam tahapan pembentukan peraturan perundang-undangan di tingkat nasional. Adapun tulisan ini menyimpulkan bahwa dalam rangka merumuskan analisis dampak hak asasi manusia atas rancangan undang-undang, secara fundamental dalam perspektif ilmu hukum diperlukan pergeseran paradigma doctrinal gaze yang cenderung positivistik; yang kerap melanda penelitian hukum di Indonesia. Dengan meminjam metode dan teknik analisis yang dikenal dalam sains dan ilmu-ilmu sosial lainnya, dan dengan tetap berpegang pada standar reasoning penegakan hukum, maka pelbagai rupa ‘pseudo-prediction’dapat dilakukan dalam rangka menilai dampak dari sebuah rancangan undang-undang terhadap hak asasi manusia

Financing SME growth in the UK: meeting the challenges after the global financial crisis

In the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis new forms of SME finance are emerging in the place of traditional banking and equity finance sources. This Special Issue has its origins in a conference organised in June 2014 by the Centre for Enterprise and Economic Development Research (CEEDR) at Middlesex University Business School, where all but the final two papers were presented. The Conference was designed to provide a timely forum for leading academics, practitioners and policy makers to disseminate current research and practitioner knowledge exploring finance gaps and how best to address the financing needs of small high growth potential businesses

The Stardust Interstellar Dust Collector Crater Origins and Hypervelocity Cratering at Oblique Angles in Aluminum Foil

From 1999 to 2006 the NASA Stardust mission collected cometary particles from the Wild 2 comet and interstellar dust from the interstellar medium in two collectors made from aerogel tiles and aluminum foil. By studying their isotopic compositions, these particles can provide us with information about nucleosynthetic processes in stars. Both collector trays are being studied for traces of these particles, though a number of challenges have arisen in doing so. Identifying impact craters in the aluminum foil on the interstellar collector tray has been incredibly difficult. In addition to being only a few micrometers or less in diameter, many craters may have been caused by debris from the spacecraft instead. It is currently impossible to tell a crater’s origin without much more detailed analysis. One way to determine a crater’s origin is by examining the direction of impact. Interstellar dust is likely to have impacted the collector tray normal to its surface, while other debris impacted at a variety of angles. However, this directional information is not obvious in the craters on the aluminum foil strips. We examined the results of two hypervelocity test shots of particles into aluminum foil targets, varying the angle of impact and the particle sizes used. Auger elemental analysis was carried out on a number of craters across each foil. Many craters at higher impact angles (\u3e60°) display the presence of deposited material around a crater, creating a spray pattern in the direction aligned with the direction of impact. No such patterns are observed for impacts closer to normal angles. When applied to the Stardust interstellar collector, such information may help in distinguishing craters caused by debris from those caused by interstellar dust, without the use of extensive analysis first

PROTOKOL KESEHATAN DAN GENEALOGI HUKUM DI MASA PANDEMI COVID-19

This article encapsulates the dialectics between law and science in the time of Covid-19 pandemic. It attempts to appraise the objectivity and normativity of the Health Protocol by rendering both legal and scientific characteristics. As a legal construct, the Protocol is genealogically justified from three discursive aspects of: its position between law and science, its reflection on matter and the materiality of law, and the immanent power within it. A close scrutiny towards the Protocol enables us to grasp legal objectivity and normativity not to be seen as a traditional one-way linear trajectory. In lieu, the force of law derives from plural-micro processes insisting a democratic process of knowledge in it