Intellectual Property Policy Reform

Intellectual Property Policy Reform

Fostering Innovation and Development

Edited by Christopher Arup and William van Caenegem

This state-of-the-art study argues that reforms to intellectual property (IP) should be based on the ways IP is interacting with new technologies, business models, work patterns and social mores. It identifies emerging IP reform proposals and experiments, indicating first how more rigor and independence can be built into the grant of IP rights so that genuine innovations are recognized. The original contributions then show how IP rights can be utilised, through open source licensing systems and private transfers, to disseminate knowledge. Reforms are recommended. The discussion takes in patents, copyright, trade secrets and relational obligations, considering the design of legislative directives, default principles, administrative practices, contractual terms and licence specifications.

Chapter 1: Themes and Prospects for Intellectual Property Law Reform

Christopher Arup and William van Caenegem

Subjects: law - academic, intellectual property law


Christopher Arup and William van Caenegem When we set out to collect papers around our theme, we were encouraged by a mood of constructive criticism concerning the roles that intellectual property has come to play in innovation and creativity. Broadly the criticisms concern two developments: (1) the strength of intellectual property endowments and entitlements and (2) the proliferation and manipulation of claims to intellectual property rights (see Maskus and Reichman 2005). The criticism largely comes from academic scholars and sets that community apart from practitioners who are perforce involved in pursuing the possibilities within the current laws. The criticism is constructive. Very real questions remain about the social value of intellectual property, at least for some sectors of the economy and locations around the world. It is prudent to keep alternatives to intellectual property in mind when designing new policies, for there are many other ways that innovation and creativity can be furthered. Nonetheless, academic scholars are generally thinking of ways to improve intellectual property through the institution of reforms. That is the flavour of our contributions. Essentially they pursue two lines. The first is for more rigour and discernment when deciding whether to confer intellectual property rights. This, it could be said, is merely to insist that intellectual property only rewards efforts that are innovative and creative. The second is to influence how people use intellectual property rights; specifically how they transact in them. The aim is to encourage openness, once endowments have been made, in particular to promote...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information