An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 3 - I.P.
I was doing some reading last night, and realized that I missed the concept of Intellectual Property in my copyright brainstorm.
At this point in the exercise, it seems that copyright protects the results of intellectual property (intellectual/creative work?) which can be copied. So we’ll bump IP above copyright, and keep in mind some of the discussions about the right to copy being, obviously, applicable to copyable things. This, of course, becomes a bit of a challenge as more things become copyable… but I’ll get into that more after I categorize everything to create a starting point.
Table of contents for Deconstructing Copyright
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright - Part 1 - Intro
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 2 - Concept of copyright
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 3 - I.P.
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 4 - Creator’s Rights
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 5 - Copyright Act
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 6 - Money!
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Other Summaries
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 7 - Administration
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 8 - End Users
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 9 - User Rights
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 10 – Professional Creative Reuse
- An Experiment In Deconstructing Copyright – Part 11 – Mind-mapping
Related posts
Filed under : copyright, deconstructing copyright
By Julianna Yau
On December 26, 2007
At 9:05 am
Comments :
Print This Post
By Julianna Yau
On December 26, 2007
At 9:05 am
Comments :
Print This Post
I’ll make my standard comment, which is that any discussion including the term “intellectual property” outside of someone who has taken a university property law course is likely going to be nonsense. People have an emotional attachment to tangible property that simply doesn’t map onto patents, copyright, trademark (PCT - http://wsis-pct.org/ipr-disclaimer.html ) Then again, peoples conception of tangible property don’t actually map very well onto how property law actually works eithor, but that is another story.
I tend to put the term “Intellectual Property” into the category of a rhetorical device to suggest a specific narrow way of interpreting a series of very different areas of laws governing intangibles.
http://www.digital-copyright.ca/Jefferson_Debate
It is interesting that you are doing this deconstruction. Have you grabbed a copy of “Canadian Copyright: A citizens’ guide” yet? It goes through many of these concepts quite well, and will help make sense out of the origins, justifications, current copyright law, and much of the current debates about copyright.
I actually purposely carved out the term “intellectual property” for this exercise because I want to address the intellectual vs physical property issue (in that they aren’t and should be handled the same).
I haven’t gotten a copy of that book yet, but added it to my wish list as soon as I saw your blog posting on it. If I don’t get it for my birthday, I’m getting it for myself next month!