POLICING ACCESS TO KNOWLEDGE: AN ANALYSIS OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROHIBITION REGIME A Dissertation (original) (raw)
Related papers
Piracy: Leakages from Modernity, 2014
Intellectual property rights (IPR) are a central aspect of the global communication infrastructure. Increasingly, what Nadelmann describes as a global prohibition regime (GPR) is emerging to protect the IPR of multinational corporations. The GPR model is significant to communication policy studies because it allows researchers to frame the political, moral, judicial and police responses to IPR infringement and compare those responses to current and historical examples outside of traditional communication paradigms. The model also gauges the likelihood for success or failure of a GPR. I apply the model to current IPR regulation in conjunction with literature criticizing the political economy of communication and the nature of information policy in the global economy. After establishing the literature and giving an overview of historical models of GPRs including high seas piracy and drug trafficking, I provide a model for the IPR GPR. I analyze the model through a case study involving pressures on Spain by the U.S. and coalitions of multinational corporations in the intellectual property industries, and conclude that the IPR GPR, in practice, runs the risk of creating perceptions of democratic deficits among citizens and failing to legitimize norms against intellectual property infringement on the Internet. Keywords: Global prohibition regimes, intellectual property rights, piracy, information policy, political economy
Enforcement of intellectual property rights
Intellectual Property Law Directions, 2014
Politicisation of intellectual property, driven by the digitisation of media and the rapid expansion of the internet, has made intellectual property rights relevant not only for a limited number of corporate actors, but increasingly for individual citizens in their everyday practices. The article assesses the current state of intellectual property politics and draws attention to three parallel processes: 1) the growing focus on enforcement, 2) the plurilateralisation of international intellectual property policies, and 3) the trend towards open access. The regional focus of this analysis is on Europe, but similar trends are visible in the US as well.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2016
The judiciary fulfils a central role in relation to intellectual property enforcement. The EU Commission's public consultation of December 2015 contains a specific subsection devoted to specialized courts, asking whether legal action at a court specialized in intellectual property provides an added value compared to legal action at other courts. CEIPI comments on the consultation aim at contributing to an informed debate on specialization and intellectual property adjudication, a debate revolving around technical complexity, judicial design, and the broader understanding of the legal system.
The Transformation of Global Intellectual Property Protection
Global Intellectual Property Protection and New Constitutionalism, 2021
This chapter traces the transformation of global intellectual property protection. The classical Convention regime, epitomised by the Paris Convention protecting industrial property and the Berne Convention protecting copyright, dominated the international IP scene for about a century. Other norm sets have become relevant for IP more recently. These often strengthen IP rights or grant them complementary protection and include international investment agreements (IIAs), predominantly in the form of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and investment chapters in trade treaties; the protection of property ownership as a fundamental right; private regulation of IP; and IP-specific counter-norms. Ultimately, this transformation of global IP law necessitates a broadening of the constitutional discourses relevant for IP. Constitutional pluralism, new constitutionalism, and societal constitutionalism represent the main currents of such global constitutional discourses.
Enforcement vs. access: wrestling with intellectual property on the internet
The last years have seen a growing politicisation of intellectual property issues, especially those relative to the internet. The politicisation of intellectual property, driven by the digitisation of media and the rapid expansion of the internet, has made intellectual property rights relevant not only for a limited number of corporate actors, but increasingly for individual citizens and their everyday practices. With the growing number of participating actors and an expanded scope of intellectual property rights, the complexity of the policy field is on the rise. This article assesses the current state of IP politics and draws attention to three parallel processes, which structure the future development of intellectual property policies related to the internet: 1) the growing focus on enforcement, 2) the plurilateralisation of international IP policies, and 3) the trend to open access. The regional focus of this analysis is on Europe, but similar trends are visible in the US as well.
The Case against Copyright: A Comparative Institutional Analysis of Intellectual Property Regimes
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2004
Contemporary debates over intellectual property ("IP") generally evidence positions that appear to line up at opposite ends of the same axis, with one side arguing for more rights for IP owners under each major regime-patent, trademark, and copyright-and the other side arguing for fewer. Approaching from what some may see as a "more" IP view, this paper offers the counterintuitive suggestion to consider abolishing one of these IP regimescopyright, at least with respect to the entertainment industry, which represents one of that regime's most commercially significant users. This realization is in fact consistent with the underlying view because the view is not accurately seen as even being directed to the "more" or "less" debate; and instead is focused on means as much as ends. In keeping with this means-directed approach, the paper provides the first comprehensive analysis of IP regimes using the set of tools from the field of new institutional economics. In so doing the paper offers the first normative case for IP that connects the path breaking literature on the theory of property rights generally with the seminal theories of the firm, transaction costs,
Introduction: Rethinking the Politics of Intellectual Property
Politics of Intellectual Property, 2009
Seen from the vantage point of political analysis, however, and at the risk of oversimplifi cation, the current literature suff ers from two weaknesses. First, the fi eld is overly generalized, with too much attention paid to the confl icts over international (global and regional) rules and legal provisions at the expense of analysis of what is happening within countries. Certainly, international rules, whether TRIPS or the IP provisions of regional and bilateral trade agreements (RBTAs), impose constraints on national policy and establish the parameters of what sorts of policies are permissible. Yet within these parameters the questions of how actors respond to external constraints and how countries go about implementing their externally-derived obligations warrant signifi cantly more attention than they typically receive. The prevailing focus on the international arena and on external sources of IP policy change means that we still have little appreciation and understanding of these latter sets of questions.
Intellectual Property & Global Policy
Global Policy, 2016
This article discusses Intellectual Property Rights and in particular global IPR expansion. That globally protected intellectual property (IP) is more valuable than ever must be set against the fact that today's global network capitalism, in which IP is so valuable, also enables information to circulate beyond IP control. Similarly, global IP expansion and its resistance go hand in hand, as global IP expansionist policy contains but also encourages infringement. We document this conflict, the paradoxical space affording it, the boundary disputes that manifest it, and the global IP expansionist policy 'ratchet' designed, but which fails, to contain it. We then evaluate global IPRs and the case for extensions, as manifested in treaties