Cantitate/Preț
Produs
Total produse
Vezi coșul
The Eureka Myth: Creators, Innovators, and Everyday Intellectual Property de Jessica Silbey

The Eureka Myth: Creators, Innovators, and Everyday Intellectual Property

Autor Jessica Silbey
en Limba Engleză Paperback – 17 dec 2014
Are innovation and creativity helped or hindered by our intellectual property laws? In the two hundred plus years since the Constitution enshrined protections for those who create and innovate, we're still debating the merits of IP laws and whether or not they actually work as intended. Artists, scientists, businesses, and the lawyers who serve them, as well as the Americans who benefit from their creations all still wonder: what facilitates innovation and creativity in our digital age? And what role, if any, do our intellectual property laws play in the growth of innovation and creativity in the United States?

Incentivizing the "progress of science and the useful arts" has been the goal of intellectual property law since our constitutional beginnings. The Eureka Myth cuts through the current debates and goes straight to the source: the artists and innovators themselves. Silbey makes sense of the intersections between intellectual property law and creative and innovative activity by centering on the stories told by artists, scientists, their employers, lawyers and managers, describing how and why they create and innovate and whether or how IP law plays a role in their activities. Their employers, business partners, managers, and lawyers also describe their role in facilitating the creative and innovative work. Silbey's connections and distinctions made between the stories and statutes serve to inform present and future innovative and creative communities.

Breaking new ground in its examination of the U.S. economy and cultural identity, The Eureka Myth draws out new and surprising conclusions about the sometimes misinterpreted relationships between creativity and intellectual property protections.
Citește tot Restrânge

Toate formatele și edițiile

Toate formatele și edițiile Preț Express
Paperback (1) 19610 lei  3-5 săpt.
  Stanford University Press – 17 dec 2014 19610 lei  3-5 săpt.
Hardback (1) 69192 lei  6-8 săpt.
  Stanford University Press – 16 dec 2014 69192 lei  6-8 săpt.

Preț: 19610 lei

Nou

Puncte Express: 294
Preț estimativ în valută:
3754€ • 3940$ • 3101£

Carte disponibilă

Livrare economică 09-23 ianuarie 25

 Adaugă în coș

Wish list
Gift list
Am citit!
Adaugă în listă
Preluare comenzi: 021 569.72.76

Specificații

ISBN-13: 9780804783385
ISBN-10: 0804783381
Pagini: 368
Dimensiuni: 152 x 229 x 23 mm
Greutate: 0.48 kg
Editura: Stanford University Press
Colecția Stanford Law Books

Recenzii

"Ultimately, The Eureka Myth does truly 'chart new terrain for our understanding of . . . scientific and artistic innovation and the intellectual property that purports to sustain them' (pp.5–6). Silbey offers unique insights into the work and motivations of creators and innovators and makes an original and thoughtful contribution to the discourse on intellectual property rights. The Eureka Myth would be a good addition to an academic law library collection, and it is a worthwhile read for anyone interested in intellectual law and policy."—Morgan M. Stoddard, Law Library Journal

"The purpose of intellectual property laws is to promote the 'progress of science and useful arts' by securing property rights for authors and creators . . . Silbey articulates a compelling challenge to the incentive argument . . . A compelling counter to common assumption about IP law, backed by interesting anecdotal evidence, that will interest IP law scholars and practitioners . . . Recommended."—C. Fruin, CHOICE

"The Eureka Myth substantially advances our understanding of why and how artists, scientists, businesses, and the lawyers who serve them use intellectual property as part of broader strategies, and how both economic and moral claims about creativity and IP match—and mismatch—with the formal law."—Rebecca Tushnet, Georgetown University Law Center

"The Eureka Myth enriches our empirical understanding of the roles that intellectual property laws play in the lives of individual creators in scientific, and more literary and artistic fields. This provocative book explains why creators sometimes under-enforce their rights, and contrary to the common assumptions of IP specialists, it shows that individual creators rarely think of intellectual property rights as an inducement to be creative."—Pamela Samuelson, Berkeley Law School

"The relationship between intellectual property law and human creativity is too often assumed rather than interrogated. By listening to creators, Silbey uncovers new and different reasons why people create and how intellectual property matters. This wise and luminous book is required reading for anyone who claims to understand IP law."—Julie E. Cohen, Georgetown University
"At last—a book that provides the only sound basis for sound policy. Silbey did the hard work of asking those who create why they create and what they need to keep creating. In place of phony political bromides like 'I stand with artists,' we can finally hear what artists themselves say. We should listen."—Bill Patry, Senior Copyright Counsel, Google

Notă biografică

Jessica Silbey is Professor of Law at Suffolk University Law School. Professor Silbey's work engages a cultural analysis of law. Professor Silbey has written for various journals and news outlets, and is coeditor of Law and Justice on the Small Screen (2012).

Cuprins

Contents and Abstracts
Introduction: Introduction
chapter abstract

The introduction introduces the book as a qualitative empirical interview study with artists, scientists, engineers and business people in creative and innovative industries. It situates the book as an investigation into the motives and mechanisms of creative and innovative work and in the context of the theoretical and quantitative literature on IP and its success at achieving the "progress of science and the useful arts," a Constitutional goal. Based on analysis of the accounts from the interviews, the introduction describes how there exists a diversity of reasons for and mechanisms by which creative and innovative work gets made and distributed, only a small part of which is intellectual property law. This challenges core principles of IP law, especially an assumption that exclusivity through property rights is essential to stimulating art, science and technological progress.

1Inspired Beginnings
chapter abstract

Chapter 1 traces the features of a specific story form, "the origin story" throughout the interviews. An "origin story" begins with an inspired moment that sets the person or organization on its path. Origin stories serves particular purposes. They explain how a culture or society began (e.g., Genesis). They infuse an aspect of everyday life with special significance by explaining why things are as they are (e.g., "you were born that way"). They guide how things should evolve in the future (e.g., "the agreement memorializes our future intentions"). Each interviewee explains a milestone in their professional life in terms of an origin story, referring to a past that has unique significance for making sense of the present. Chapter 1 canvasses these origin stories to explain how most describe the embarkation of their work in art or science mostly due to intrinsic or serendipitous forces, unrelated to IP.

2Daily Craft: Work Makes Work
chapter abstract

Chapter 2 explores the varied ways the interviewees describe their daily work. Similarities in accounts coalesce around the dimensions of time, space and labor. Most articulate a common respect for constant and committed daily work, focusing on the importance of physical spaces (studio, lab, desk) and time spent. Distinct metaphors and word patterns illuminate the expressive focus on time, space and labor, highlighting a misfit between IP protection and the interviewees' aspirations or expectations for reward. Interviewees describe work with natural metaphors (e.g., harvesting or fishing), implying that the physical labor dignifies the output. This contrasts with IP, which does not reward labor or time. Interviewees translate their intellectual work into tangible output, comparing their work to real or personal property. Ironically, describing the value of their work in material terms strengthens the possessive impulse manifesting as property claims that are more robust than IP law provides.

3Making Do With A Mismatch
chapter abstract

Chapter 3 describes the transitions from beginnings and everyday work to the business of developing a career in IP-rich fields. Interviewees provide diverse accounts of "making do" in creative and innovative industries. Although some interviewees describe direct reliance on specific forms of IP, many business models rely only indirectly on IP rights. Indeed, most interviewees embrace a system of IP that is "leaky" or misaligned insofar as IP is not the optimal avenue for achieving professional goals. Interviewees rarely describe the need to exercise the full range of exclusivity to which IP law entitles them. Although IP rights are both under-enforced and over-enforced at times, the most common strategy interviewees describe is to relax IP rights in order to achieve three common goals: a sustainable business, productive and satisfying relationships, and a measure of autonomy in life and work.

4Reputation
chapter abstract

Chapter 4 describes how interviewees value reputation and attribution. When asked to describe some of the most contentious infractions during their career, interviewees describe reputational free riding, not economic free riding. And where the two intersect (which is often, especially in the trademark context), language of dignity and desert rather than economic harm dominates. Moreover, interviewees assert a desire for reputational control from IP law where it rarely exists. This Chapter analyzes the common accounts and metaphors that predominate in stories of reputational injury ¿ stories of family, bodily integrity and life or death. Understandably, emotions run high in this context and the language seeking to justify the entitlement to reputational control often resemble stronger rights and obligations than IP (or neighboring regimes) provide. Over-protection in these situations can lead to misuse of IP laws or an increasing frustration from artists and scientists that IP law is irrelevant to them.

5Instruction: How Lawyers Harvest IP
chapter abstract

Chapter Five describes how IP intervenes as an external force shaping and directing art and science. IP law affecting the work's on-going vitality is largely absent until a lawyer or business partner intervenes. IP arrives later for creative and innovative work trajectory and comes with a coach. Interviewees describe lawyers as disruptive and distracting, whereas the lawyer describes herself as bringing tools to facilitate work or business. When the lawyer is welcome, it is when she has translated IP into client interests resonating with everyday work or goals. The lawyer's varied characterizations of IP in terms the client accepts correlates to jurisprudential categories of legality (e.g., natural law, distributive justice). This invites the conclusion that IP's form and purpose, shaped by legal advice and client concerns, is not predetermined by legal rules or economic principles, but is constitutive of creativity and innovation and influenced by preexisting interests and motivations.

6Distribution: How IP Circulates
chapter abstract

Dissemination is the ultimate goal of IP and a dominant reason interviewees pursue their work. Interviewees describe managing formal and informal agreements outlining the nature and scope of distribution. These agreements vary, from free and promiscuous sharing to circumscribed and discriminating price schemes. The propertization of the work (protecting it through exclusivity) is sometimes a precondition to fulfilling distribution goals, which include: earning a living, building relationships, sustaining professional autonomy and challenging core competencies. But interviewees describe how relaxed distribution networks satisfy most personal and professional goals. Indeed, strictly controlling dissemination ¿ what IP law provides ¿ is only one distributional method and not the most common. This chapter analyzes the interviews for accounts of the many forms dissemination takes and the reasons for engaging in it, unpacking the relationships between exclusive rights to distribution on the one hand and dissemination as a form of professional and personal success on the other.

Conclusion: Conclusion
chapter abstract

The book closes with a summary of how U.S. intellectual property regimes are misaligned with the needs of and hopes for those engaging in creative and inventive work. It further suggests reasons for and ways that the IP system should remain misaligned: to promote choice and flexibility for creators and innovators (whether or not they own or claim IP rights). But the conclusion also suggests places in our IP system where some relaxation of our IP system might usefully occur in order to facilitate core concerns of IP-rich fields and their audience as accounted for in the interview data.