+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Weighing intellectual property: Can we balance the social costs and benefits of patenting?

Weighing intellectual property: Can we balance the social costs and benefits of patenting?

History of Science; An Annual Review of Literature, Research and Teaching 57(1): 140-163

The scale is the most famous emblem of the law, including intellectual property (IP). Because IP rights impose social costs on the public by limiting access to protected work, the law can be justified only to the extent that, on balance, it encourages enough creation and dissemination of new works to offset those costs. The scale is thus a potent rhetorical trope of fairness and objectivity, but also an instrument the law thinks with - one that is constantly invoked to justify or to question the extent of available IP protection. The balancing act that underlies the legitimacy of IP is, however, literally impossible to perform. Because we are unable to measure the benefits that IP has for inventors or the costs it has for the public, the scale has nothing to weigh. It conveys a clear sense that IP law can be balanced, but in fact propagates only a visible simulacrum of balance - one that is as empty as it is powerful.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 066597843

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 30880495

DOI: 10.1177/0073275318797787

Related references

Comprehensive health assessments for adults with intellectual disability living in the community - weighing up the costs and benefits. Australian Family Physician 41(12): 969-972, 2013

Opposition in Social Interaction amongst Children: Why Intellectual Benefits Do Not Mean Social Costs. Social Development 15(2): 205-231, 2006

Intellectual property landscape and patenting opportunity in biofuels. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology 16(1): 33-46, 2010

Innovations and intellectual property: the case of genomic patenting. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 22(1): 5-25, 2003

Patenting, intellectual property rights and food biotechnology. British food journal8(4-5): 20-23, 1996

Patenting pluripotence: the next battle for stem cell intellectual property. Nature Biotechnology 26(4): 393-395, 2008

Patenting life: biotechnology, intellectual property, and environmental ethics. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review. Boston College. Law School 22(2): 267-305, 1995

Workshop on intellectual property rights an overview of patenting requirements. In vitro cellular and developmental biology Plant: journal of the Tissue Culture Association 36(1): 3-6, 2000

Patenting the PKU test--federally funded research and intellectual property. New England Journal of Medicine 369(9): 792-794, 2013

Workshop on Intellectual Property Rights an Overview of Patenting Requirements. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology. Plant 36(1): 3-6, 2000

Patenting the bomb: nuclear weapons, intellectual property, and technological control. Isis; An International Review Devoted to the History of Science and Its Cultural Influences 99(1): 57-87, 2008

Patents versus patenting: implications of intellectual property protection for biological research. Nature Biotechnology 27(1): 36-40, 2009

Patenting nature or protecting culture? Ethnopharmacology and indigenous intellectual property rights. Journal of Law and the Biosciences 3(1): 217-226, 2016

Sharing intellectual property rights--an exploratory study of joint patenting amongst companies. Industrial and Corporate Change 12(5): 1035-1050, 2003

The unexamined assumptions of intellectual property: adopting an evaluative approach to patenting biotechnological innovation. Public Affairs Quarterly 18(4): 299-344, 2005