Digital and analog logics: An analysis of the discourse on property rights and information goods (original) (raw)
Related papers
Property and the Construction of the Information Economy: A Neo-Polanyian Ontology
This chapter considers the changing roles and forms of information property within the political economy of informational capitalism. I begin with an overview of the principal methods used in law and in media and communications studies, respectively, to study information property, considering both what each disciplinary cluster traditionally has emphasized and newer, hybrid directions. Next, I develop a three-part framework for analyzing information property as a set of emergent institutional formations that both work to produce and are themselves produced by other evolving political-economic arrangements. The framework considers patterns of change in existing legal institutions for intellectual property, the ongoing dematerialization and datafication of both traditional and new inputs to economic production, and the emerging logics of economic organization within which information resources (and property rights) are mobilized. Finally, I consider the implications of that framing for two very different contemporary information property projects, one relating to data flows within platform-based business models and the other to information commons.
The Concept of Property in the Digital Age
Berkeley Center For Law and Technology, 2008
In this Essay I argue that the basic case for property is still a very strong one. Individual control over individual assets still makes sense. I defend property rights in digital creations in the face of two general scholarly critiques: The first is what I call digital determinism --the idea that the central driving force behind IP policy should be the technological imperatives of digital creation and distribution. I argue that the inherent logic of digital technology should not drive IP policy. Second, I discuss the idea that the distinctive feature of digital technology, and therefore the thing that policy should most seek to encourage, is collective creativity. I argue that individual creators are still crucial, and that IP law does not interfere with widely dispersed collective works such as Wikis. Finally, I push for recognition that IP policy should not be blinded by the promise of massive amounts of amateur content; solicitude for what I call "creative professionals" --people who make a living creating high-quality content --has been and must continue to be an important part of IP law.
2022
The present paper focuses on the analysis of bibliography, jurisprudence, and case studies internationally such as Bragg v Linden Labs, forming an analysis of the obstacles for the recognition of virtual property as well as providing arguments for its acknowledgment on a multitude of legal systems internationally, all the while incentivizing the debate for its implementation with the use of a set of doctrines and directives. For this purpose, we will make comparisons of the different concepts of property on an international scale through the analysis of a host of different doctrines and jurisprudence from the United States, Europe, Russia, and Brazil, aiming to demonstrate the resilience or acceptance of this concept of property. Finally, we will present at the end of this article the directives that will serve to guide future discussions and implementations of virtual property.
Technological Neutrality: Recalibrating Copyright in the Information Age
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000
This Article aims to draw the connection between how we conceptualize legal rights over information resources and our capacity to develop technologically neutral legal norms in the information age. More specifically, it identifies and critically examines three competing approaches to the idea of technological neutrality apparent in copyright jurisprudence. Ultimately, it is argued that true technological neutrality requires not simply the seamless expansion of legal rights into new technological contexts, but the careful, contextual recalibration of rights and interests in light of shifting values and changing circumstances. As a normative principle, technological neutrality in copyright law thus demands a nuanced and relational understanding of the rights at play, and the social values that they seek to foster as technologies evolve. IntroductIon If this is, indeed, the "information era" in which we find ourselves, then the power to own, control, and access information is surely the power that will define our era and determine our future. Just as control over the means of 601
Bridging the Digital Divide in the Digital Economy with Reference to Intellectual Property
Journal of Law and Political Sciences Vol. 28, No. 03, 2021
Computer networks are widely used in digital work across the globe, and easy access to the world wide web has led to widespread information of all the digital form sectors. In digital form, such abundance of information has given so many benefits to the countries such as publishing, creating, using, distributing, and reusing has become so easy compared to the past decades. Therefore, the good thing is the information enrichment, which benefits the people as individuals and society as a whole. However, the bad news is it also to misuse and illegally copying, distributing, and using of information illegally. Therefore, the paper aims to address the international intellectual property treaties and agreements, which led to the digital divide in the digital economy. Qualitative data analysis is used in this paper as a research method to define the concept of the digital divide in the context of the digital economy and illustrate the role of international intellectual property in the digital world. The research also sheds light on stakeholders' perspectives in order to stem the digital economy. The researcher also explores this digital divide's reasons while looking at gaps between policies and their implementation in the digital world. The research comes to an end while concluding that all the international intellectual property agreements and policies have failed in their implementation, which has further widened this digital gap.