Intellectual property rights help to regulate creative labour. They can include, patents for inventions, and trademarks to help protect market share. They can also refer to copyright; ‘literary works (such as novels, poems and plays), films, music, artistic works (e.g. drawings, paintings, photographs and sculptures) and architectural design’.
Intellectual property rights grant owners exclusive rights. These rights enable them to carry out specific acts, while at the same time, excluding others from the same privileges. In turn, this allows owners to charge higher prices for their intellectual property products, as well as allowing them to restrict others from using them. It is apparent then, that intellectual property rights can confer …show more content…
Locke attempts to justify intellectual property rights through his idea of an expenditure of labour. He mentions that the act of labour, justifies the idea of physical objects entering into the ‘labourer’s realm’, which then leads to ownership. However, he also states that a labourer’s right is subject to the ‘no harm principle’. This helps to ensure that an individual’s property rights are only protected as long as they abide by certain rules, which help to benefit the general public. Furthermore, Locke specifies that the following regulations should be met; the ‘no-spoliation Proviso’ (a labourer should only take an amount that he will utilise) and the ‘enough and as good Proviso’ (a good enough amount should be left for …show more content…
A number of arguments for the justification of the utilitarian theory and the justification of intellectual property rights, have been developed since then.
Although, many argue that the utilitarianism does not appropriately justify intellectual property rights. For example, utilitarianism has been criticised for focusing on the benefits for the general public but, neglecting the rights of the creators. Boyle adequately highlights this lack of recognition, ‘too many “incentives” could convert the public domain into a fallow landscape of private plots’.
As well as this, there are also practical costs that come with the benefits of monetary incentives. For example, in order to obtain a patent, application fees are necessary. Moreover, enforcing a copyright or patent also requires lawyers and court fees to be paid. Many people would also argue that if copyright or patents were unavailable, alternative benefits would help incentivise creators, such as inventions that help to make people’s lives
Intellectual property rights grant owners exclusive rights. These rights enable them to carry out specific acts, while at the same time, excluding others from the same privileges. In turn, this allows owners to charge higher prices for their intellectual property products, as well as allowing them to restrict others from using them. It is apparent then, that intellectual property rights can confer …show more content…
Locke attempts to justify intellectual property rights through his idea of an expenditure of labour. He mentions that the act of labour, justifies the idea of physical objects entering into the ‘labourer’s realm’, which then leads to ownership. However, he also states that a labourer’s right is subject to the ‘no harm principle’. This helps to ensure that an individual’s property rights are only protected as long as they abide by certain rules, which help to benefit the general public. Furthermore, Locke specifies that the following regulations should be met; the ‘no-spoliation Proviso’ (a labourer should only take an amount that he will utilise) and the ‘enough and as good Proviso’ (a good enough amount should be left for …show more content…
A number of arguments for the justification of the utilitarian theory and the justification of intellectual property rights, have been developed since then.
Although, many argue that the utilitarianism does not appropriately justify intellectual property rights. For example, utilitarianism has been criticised for focusing on the benefits for the general public but, neglecting the rights of the creators. Boyle adequately highlights this lack of recognition, ‘too many “incentives” could convert the public domain into a fallow landscape of private plots’.
As well as this, there are also practical costs that come with the benefits of monetary incentives. For example, in order to obtain a patent, application fees are necessary. Moreover, enforcing a copyright or patent also requires lawyers and court fees to be paid. Many people would also argue that if copyright or patents were unavailable, alternative benefits would help incentivise creators, such as inventions that help to make people’s lives