You are looking at 1 - 10 of 14 items

  • Author or Editor: James Griffin x
Clear All Modify Search
This content is available to you

James Griffin

This content is available to you

James Griffin

Since the inception of the State, creativity has been of critical importance. This chapter introduces the basic concepts of how creativity has been central and continues to be so. It argues that the development of legal rules has seen a gradual shift away from the consideration of creativity as a relevant factor in regulation. This has been exacerbated through the use of proprietary and capitalistic concepts. This chapter outlines the subsequent chapters, and provides an indication of the reforms that are proposed later in the monograph

You do not have access to this content

James Griffin

This chapter focuses upon the limits of regulation, by considering the individual - State relationship. It suggests that the main critical component of creativity is that termed ‘inner creativity’ within individuals, something which State regulation cannot normally reach. It is argued that only in what is called the ‘push button order’, where life and death is at the whim of the State, would regulation of ‘inner creativity’ be completely possible. Nonetheless, there has been a gradual influencing of ‘inner creativity’ through the regulation of expressed ‘outer creativity.’ It is argued that ‘inner creativity’ will influence the effectiveness of the regulation of general creativity, because the ‘inner creativity’ influences the perceived rationality of the State. This has an impact in the effectiveness of regulation in areas such as file sharing, or sharing of 3D & 4D printed scans and files. The chapter investigates the centrality of proprietary and economic reasoning in courts to assess how the State has sought to regulate ‘inner creativity’ and what this suggests about the future of the individual-State relationship in an age of increasing machination.

You do not have access to this content

James Griffin

The chapter begins with a consideration of the history of creativity within society, and notes that creative acts began prior to the existence of IP law - or, indeed, formalised law. The chapter will follow the progression of law as enabling the dissemination of creative expression, moving into a period of regulatory fetters. The focus of the State was on the expression of works, rather than the inner creativity. That inner creativity remained a protected space, both physical and mental. However, more recent developments, including the rise of an economic dialogue, along with the development of digital machinic technologies, poses a regulatory challenge as the may endanger the inner creative space.

You do not have access to this content

James Griffin

The relationship between inner and outer creativity takes place within a broad discourse. This chapter argues that the discourse has been influenced by the rise of the property paradigm, and the chapter investigates how that paradigm arose. Assumptions have been made about the nature of property, and it is argued that this has skewed the focus of regulation away from creativity per se, towards more capitalist conceptions of exploitation. It is argued that there has formed an administrative core of property, where debate about the scope of property protection becomes impossible. As a result, increasingly the zone of discourse has become focused around economics principles, but such principles lead to confusion between units of exchange and the processes of creativity necessary for the continued creative development of the State.

You do not have access to this content

James Griffin

The space between the zone of discourse and the administrative core is a true zona of emptiness, the remains of a forest of discourse awaiting the arrival of the administrator bodies. The space is a free for all, where the brutish side of humankind is let loose. Laws may dictate one thing, but people may do another within the zone. If a threatening individual acts as if they are the administrative body, then they will influence the reproductive flow. Such an act can lead to sedimentation in the flow, leading to an act becoming not just as if it were administrative, but to become part of the administration. This chapter is concerned with such acts, and this is achieved with the notion of the threat. Threats are not mere descriptive words and actions, they are methods by which to compel another to do something that at a moment in time cannot be forced by law. Threats alter the relationship of the zone of discourse and the administrative core. Threats need to be understood if any legal reform is to have a result in actuality.

You do not have access to this content

James Griffin

This chapter will assess how the processes of reproduction and creativity have been impacted by regulation. In particular, it is argued that reproduction is a critical component of creativity, but that there has been little attention paid to the importance of reproduction as part of the creative process. This is the case in both literature analysing ideas and creativity, as well as legal regulation. This chapter therefore proposes the concept of the reproductive flow, representing the importance of reproduction in an RNA-DNA relationship with creativity. The failure to recognise the reproductive flow in philosophical literature and legal rules is considered, and the consequence of this analysed. A definition of reproductive flow is given, in order to set the groundwork for the legal reform proposed in subsequent chapters.

You do not have access to this content

James Griffin

The regulation of creative works has become enmeshed in a bureaucratic system that is based around proprietary and economic concerns. These concerns have developed in a manner that has seen the focus of regulation shift from the concerns of the necessity of creativity, to a focus upon economic optimisation. Focusing too much on the latter could imperil creativity, thereby depriving society of one of the key drivers in the development of the individual. This part of the monograph establishes how a system related to the necessity of creativity could be implemented today. Three chapters will achieve this – the first will assess how the principles of creativity could be identified, the second will identify how these principles can be enforced and put forward proposals for reform, and third, how the proposed system could be implemented and operate in practice.

You do not have access to this content

James Griffin

The monograph has, so far, argued that the necessity of creativity is being imperilled within the modern-day State, and that this in turn endangers the development of technologies such as 3D printing. Creativity has been critical to the development of the State, and this has relied upon the expression of the inner creativity of individuals. It is imperative that the zone of discourse is preserved, and not threatened by the overgrowth of an administrative zone. It was also argued that the flow of reproduction is equally important for the existence of creativity. This maintains the rationality of the State. To this end, the previous chapter outlined how economic reasoning has come to mask and hide the importance of creativity, and it proposed a creativity fund to help encourage access to existing creative works. This chapter takes the proposals further, to clearly set out the proposed systems.

You do not have access to this content

James Griffin

This chapter focuses more upon the regulatory oversight of the proposed systems. There is a focus upon how a body, ideally a combination of the existing Copyright Tribunal and Copyright Hub, could regulate of the proposed systems. There will be safeguards implemented to prevent the regulation of the system resulting in the rise of the zone of discourse being encroached upon by the administrative core (chapter 6). The Copyright Hub, in particular, can interface closely with digital technologies through licensing platforms – and this may have consequences for the future direction of regulation. It means that regulation can focus specifically on particular uses, which might potentially impinge upon the traditional creative ‘wriggle room’ that copyright law - and indeed, many other areas of law – provided. The impact of this will be considered, and safeguards against the removal of this traditional ‘space’ are put forward. This chapter will involve consideration of the recent developments concerning “identifiers” and content management information (CMI), alongside digital watermarking. These areas are becoming ever more important within newer technologies such as 3D printing and augmented reality.