Open Borders, Intellectual Property Policy, and Federal Criminal Trade Secret Law

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shubha Ghosh
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Open Borders ◽  
Intellectual Property Policy

Intellectual Property: Theory, Privilege, and Pragmatism

2003 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam D. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Social Constructions ◽  
Property Theory ◽  
General Terms ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Definition Of

In the most general terms, this article focuses on the tension between competing justifications of intellectual property. Section I examines the nature and definition of economic pragmatism and argues that, while economic pragmatism comes in many flavors, each is either unstable or self-defeating. Section II advances the view that Anglo-American systems of intellectual property have both theoretical and pragmatic features. In Section III a sketch of a theory is offered--a theory that may limit applications of economic pragmatism and provide the foundation for copyright, patent, and trade secret institutions. To be justified--to warrant coercion on a worldwide scale--systems of intellectual property should be grounded in theory. Intellectual property rights are, in essence, no different than our rights to life, liberty, and tangible property. Intellectual property rights are neither pure social constructions nor bargains without foundations.

scholarly journals Do Cultural Differences Impact on Intellectual Property Protection in the United States and China?

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meihua Chen ◽  
Tao Jin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Knowledge Economy ◽  
Cultural Influences ◽  
Core Competency ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Intellectual Property Protection ◽  
Knowledge Practices

In a knowledge economy, intellectual property is highly related to core competency of an organization. Without proper protection, the competitive advantage is vulnerable to imitation and counterfeiting. Intellectual property protection can be seen as information and knowledge activities that are taken to prevent trademark, patent, copyright, and trade secret infringement. Between the United States and China, there is an intense and enduring controversy on intellectual property protection. Many previous relevant studies on this issue adopted a legal and governance approach, rarely focusing on the effect of cultural differences on these information and knowledge practices. This paper reports the theoretical exploration portion of an on-going empirical research on the cultural influences that impact intellectual property protection in the two countries, aiming to draw some implications for the field of knowledge management.

What nanotech inventors need to know about trade secrets and the prior user rights defense

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chinh H. Pham ◽  
Ross Spencer Garsson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Secret ◽  
Trade Secrets ◽  
The World ◽  
New Challenges ◽  
The Many

AbstractThe America Invents Act (AIA) presents new challenges and strategy considerations for nanotechnology inventors and companies that seek to protect their intellectual property in the United States. Among the many notable changes, the AIA expands the “prior user rights” defense to infringement and broadens the classes of patents that are eligible for the new limited prior user rights defense. While this defense is limited in some instances, such as against universities, it could be invaluable in others, such as when a competitor independently discovers and patents the trade secret. In the world of nanotechnology, where inventions and products are increasingly complex, this protection can prove to be vitally important.

Live Coding the Law: Improvisation, Code, and Copyright

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Zeilinger
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Electronic Music ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Programming Environments ◽  
Intellectual Property Policy ◽  
Improvised Music ◽  
The Law ◽  
Cultural Commons ◽  
Property Regimes

This article concerns the emerging creative practice of live coding (i.e., the real-time programming of electronic music in text-based programming environments), and explores how this practice can be deployed as a tactic of resistance against the overreach of restrictive intellectual property policy. I begin by surveying definitions of copyright and patent law, and related issues, to situate live coding in the field of existing perspectives on cultural ownership. Drawing on legal theory and critical discourse on improvised music in other genres, I then argue that the dynamic, palimpsestic, and improvisational qualities of live coding contradict many of copyright law's core assumptions regarding the nature of “fixed” works of art. These contradictions can be usefully mobilized for the purpose of resisting legal and economic enclosures of the digital cultural commons. As I conclude, live coding can, from its current, inherently ambivalent position on copyright matters, develop a strong, performance-based critical stance against the imbalances and shortcomings of intellectual property regimes and outdated notions of exclusive cultural ownership. Integrating artistic practices with ongoing and emerging critiques of intellectual property, such resistance can go a long way towards highlighting readily available opportunities to oppose and confound the law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document