外文翻譯--知識產(chǎn)權(quán)和獎勵的謬誤-全文預(yù)覽
【正文】 of the tort of invasion of privacy, not as a species of intellectual property law, perse. As with trademark, however, I do mean to include the right of publicity within the scope of my argument to the extent that it is purportedly justified on the need to supply incentives for creative labor. At any rate, once the core/traditional form of trademark is taken out of the mix, the great balance of what is left over in the intellectual property sphere, in terms of its economic significance and societal impact, is copyright and patent. Thus, my discussion below focuses mainly on these two areas of the law. As a final matter of framing the issues, I need to point out that scholars have advanced various theories that might justify intellectual The external incentive theory is only one theory. But it is by far the most influential theory, throughout the world and in the United States especially. The incentive theory carries the prestige of legions of . Supreme Court decisions. And the incentive theory is also the motivating force behind IP globalization efforts. After all, the slogan of the United Nation’s World Intellectual Property Organization is “Encouraging Creativity and Innovation.” Other theories that scholars have identified can be pelling, and occasionally they are persuasive to policymakers and courts. Noheless, the incentive theory remains the engine of IP policy. Thus, the theory’s prospective demise is significant. Here is a look ahead: In Part II, I explain the incentive theory in depth, showing why it is such a powerful intellectual argument. In Part III, I look at where intellectual property rights came from – their historical pedigree – and I show how the incentive theory, despite its logical appeal, is really best understood as a posthoc rationalization for a creature of pure politics. In Part IV, I discuss the burgeoning field of behavioral economics and what it and social 7 psychology have to say about intellectual property law. In particular, I show that the socialscience literature leads to the identification of a general rule that intellectual labors will tend to flourish naturally, without external rewards. In Part V, I look at how technology – particularly the inter and workconnected digital devices – have revealed a human passion for creative expression and puzzlesolving that corresponds with the new understandings from social science. In Part VI, I review historicalbased empirical work that tells us about the motivations of authors in the past. As we’ll see, these findings are consistent with a general rule that creative and innovative human labors are not dependent on external rewards, but, instead, will tend to flourish of their own accord. I
畢業(yè)設(shè)計相關(guān)推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號-1