ATTENDANCE BACK ASSIGNMENT: INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY RIGHTS
Name – Naina Singh
Subject – Intellectual Property Rights
Roll No. – 107
Section – B
Submitted To - Date Of submission
Ms. Garima Panwar September 30 2024
(Assistant Professor)
INTRODUCTION
The intellectual property rights function with the underlying principle of
protecting the products of human intellect in the same way physical properties are
safeguarded.
In order to prevent leakage of innovation and to save guard, the work or product
of the human thinking, intellectual property rights are given. Creative thinking is a
characteristic of human beings and it is important to save God. This characteristic
which ensures the continuous flow of creativity in the society before save
guarding the intellectual property rights.
Therefore, it can be stated that intellectual property rights are steps taken in order
to safeguard the creative thinking characteristics of human beings. As long as it
doesn’t affect the rights of other people, the purpose of the intellectual property
rights is to ensure Santa T of a creative work or creative element.
Intellectual property rights are important in today’s era as its save guards, the
sanctity of a creative work, it holds together the integrity of innovations which are
created by people for social good.
he theories of intellectual property rights play a definite role in making someone
understand the rights offered and the reason behind the same.
Overtime the justifications for intellectual property rights have award, even
though they are complex. Even though these justifications are relevant their
application in the digital age presents unique challenges since there is an ease of
copying and sharing of information.
MAJOR PHILOSOPHICAL JUSTIFICATION FOR
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS -
NATURAL RIGHTS THEORY-
The story is of philosophical belief and it states that human beings or individuals
have certain fundamental rights that are inherent to human nature. Also, these
rights are not granted by government or any other authorities. These rights cannot
be taken away or given up. Hence, they are universal in nature and inalienable.
When it comes to natural right theory, John L is considered as the most influential
components of this theory. According to John Locke individuals have three
fundamental natural rights.
1. The first right is the right to life and preservation of one’s own existence.
2. The right to liberty, which is the right to act freely without any
interference by others
3. The right to property, every individual has right to own property in
inclusion with their own body and results of their labour and intellect.
According to John Locke, in order to protect their natural rights, individuals, enter
into a social contract with the government. The legitimacy of a government
depends on its ability to up the natural rights of the citizens.
Further John lock states that by mixing their labour and natural resources,
individuals acquire property rights and this concept is widely known as labour
theory of property.
John locks application of labour theory to intellectual property rights- According
to this, by virtue of their labour and creativity, creator of a work or creator of an
intellectual work acquires property rights over those work. In simple words,
whenever someone creates something new out of their labour and intellect, they
have the right to the fruit of their labour in addition with exclusive rights to use
control and profit from such creation.
THE UTILITARIAN THEORY-
The philosophical theory of utilitarianism states that an action is considered to be
morally right if the result maximizes happiness and minimizes suffering for the
greatest number of people. This principal is applicable for justification of
intellectual property rights.
Incentive for innovation-A creator while creating or developing a new or
innovative work, invest his time, resources, and efforts And IPR can be seen as a
necessary incentive for such creators. Intellectual property rights are promise of
exclusive rights which encourages creativity and technology logical advancement
in the society.
Economic growth-Often intellectual property rights contribute in economic
growth since they promote competition, investment and innovation. It’s
stimulating economic activity as it creates a new market for products and services.
Public benefit- the ultimate goal of IPR’s is public benefit. IPL leads to
development of new technology products and services by incentivizing,
innovation and creativity.
Criticism of utilitarian theory
Monopoly power-Creators often charge excessive prices and limit competition
since I can grant such creators significant monopoly rights
Inequality-Those who have resources to acquire and enforce intellectual property
rights are more likely to benefit from IPR as compared to those who are without
such resources, hence IPR scan exhibit inequality.
Public domain-This story does not consider the importance of public domain.
Public domain is such body of creative works that are not subject to copyright or
other forms of intellectual property protection for cultural heritage, innovation,
education and research public domain is essential.
The utilitarian theory emphasizes the role of IPR in promoting innovation,
economic growth and public benefit, hence justifying the intellectual property
rights. At the same time, monopoly power and inequality draw back the potential
of IPR. Hence it is important to balance the benefits and drawbacks.
THE ETHIC AND REWARD THEORY
The ethic and reward theory considers both ethical and economic aspects of
intellectual property protection. According to this theory, moral rights are the
fruits of labour that are given to a creator for their work. Also, in addition to moral
rights. creators are provided with some exclusive rights, which can be seen as
reward for their innovation and creativity. The term “ethic” signifies “fairness”
whereas the term “reward” symbolizes “validation of the efforts contributed in a
particular thing”. Put simply, the ethics and reward theory throw light on the fact
that a creator must be rewarded for the creation and in doing so the ethics behind
intellectual property rights will be realized.
Key points -
Moral, right- regardless of economic value and societal impact on a work creators
are provided with a fundamental right to their intellectual creation known as the
moral right. According to the story, the emphasis is on the importance of a
creators, autonomy and its integrity.
Just reward- Exclusive rights are given to a creator in order to recognize their
creativity, time and resources which went in for developing their intellectual
work. Hence, such exclusive rights can be considered as rewards.
Incentive for innovation- Similar to utilitarian theory, the ethics and reward
theory states that intellectual property rights provide incentive for the creative or
innovative work that the creators create and ensures that the creator can get
benefit from their work.
Criticism of the ethics and reward theory
Subjectivity of morality- What one person Considers morally right might not be
considered morally right by another hence morality is subjective and is difficult to
define.
Economic implications-implication of IPR creates potential for monopoly power
and inequality hear the theory solely emphasizes the importance of rewarding the
creators.
Public domain- there should be a balance between the rights of creators and
public interest in order to access and use a creative work this story does not fully
addresses the importance of public domain.
In order to understand, moral and economic justification of IPR’s, the theory of
ethics and reward provides an understandable framework. The essence of this
theory is in respecting a creator’s rights and providing them with appropriate
rewards for their work.
THE PERSONHOOD THEORY-
According to the person who theory intellectual property right is a philosophical
approach, this story sees intellectual property as an extension to a creator’s
identity and personality. The theory draws its roots from Hegel’s philosophy,
which provides that intellectual property rights are also associated with
safeguarding personality development that extends to material things. In this way,
the theory remarked that an unauthorized user who offers to the general public
someone’s creation without prior consent will be considered a thief.
Regardless of the economic value or societal impact of those creations, a creator,
according to this theory have fundamental right to control and benefit from their
intellectual creations.
Key points –
Intellectual property as an extension of the creator-According to this theory,
any intellectual property is an expression of the creators, personality experiences
and values rather than just mayor objects. Hence, protecting such works is like
protecting the creator’s identity.
Moral- Rights such as the right to attribution and the right to integrity are some of
the rights that protects creators’ relationship to their work. This is what the
personhood theory emphasizes on.
Non-economic considerations- recognizing intellectual property rights can bring
significant non-economic benefits, such as preserving cultural heritage and
promoting diversity of expression which is beyond just economic considerations.
Criticism of the person who theory
Subjectivity of identity-What one person considers to be an essential part of their
identity may not be an essential part of identity for others. Therefore, the concept
of personality and identity are subjective.
Economic implications- The person who theory does not adequately recognizes
the economic implications of the intellectual property rights.
Public domain- Theory does not addresses the importance of public domain and
the need for balance between the rights of the creators and public interest in order
to access the creators’ work.
THE RELEVANCE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
JUSTIFICATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE
The traditional notions of ownership and exclusivity has been significantly
challenged by the ease of copying and sharing information in the digital age.
Which rises question about the continued relevance of the philosophical
justification of intellectual property rights.
The labour theory of property
Since the creators still invest time, effort and creativity in producing intellectual
works, the labour theory remains relevant in the digital age. Also, it has been
difficult. also, it has been becoming difficult to enforce exclusive rights and
prevent an authorized copy due to ease of reproduction.
Challenges- with minimal effort, it has been becoming possible for anyone to
copy and distribute intellectual works in the digital age. This has led to concerns
about the ability of the creators to compensate for their labour.
The utilitarian justification
IPR continues to incentivize innovation and economic growth. Therefore, the
utilitarian justification remains relevant. Through online platforms and digital
marketplace, the creators have opportunity to monetize their work.
Challenges- It has become difficult for creators to control the distribution of their
work and capture the full economic value of their creations. Since there has been
ease of copying and sharing information. This limits the incentives for economic
growth and innovation.
The personality theory
In in the digital age, the intellectual works continue to express the creator’s
identity. Hence the personality theory remains relevant. In order to protect
creators, autonomy and integrity, it is essential to protect such works.
Challenges - in the digital age, it has become difficult for the creators to control
their own creations, since it has been easier for others to manipulate and alter such
intellectual works.
The ethics and reward theory
In the digital age, the creators of the intellectual work still deserve to be
compensated for their labour and creativity. Hence the ethics and reward theory
remain relevant for their contributions to the society. Providing them with
exclusive rights can be seen as a reward.
Challenges- in the digital age, the creators face difficulty in order to get
compensated for their work since it is very easy to copy work of intellect without
getting traced. There are concerns about fairness and equity in the distribution of
benefits like compensation of intellectual property.
The person who theory
The intellectual property has continued to be expression of a creator’s identity.
Hence the person who theory remains relevant in the digital age. In order to
protect creators, autonomy and integrity, protection of intellectual work is
important.
Challenge- Creators have lesser control over their creations, since it has become
easier to manipulate and alter intellectual work in the digital age.
REFERENCES
https://epgp.inflibnet.ac.in/epgpdata/uploads/epgp_content/law/
08._intellectual_property_law/
03._theoretical_justifications_for_intellectual_property/et/5793_et_03_et.pdf
https://www.floraip.com/2018/02/19/justifying-intellectual-property-rights/
https://onlinebooks.buchundnetz.com/intellectualpropertyiscommonproperty/
chapter/1-the-classical-justifications-for-intellectual-property-rights/
https://lawbhoomi.com/intellectual-property-rights-concept-characteristics-and-
justifications/
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/colloquium_papers_e/2013/
chapter_4_2013_e.pdf
