Intellectual property: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|confi|}}Not to be confused with {{confiprov|confidential information}}, [[intellectual property]] covers [[copyright]]s, [[patent]]s, [[trade mark]]s, [[property]] rights that arise at [[common law]] (or under [[statute]] ) which can be enforced against all comers, and not simply as as a result of any {{t|contract}}.
{{a|confi|}}Not to be confused with {{confiprov|confidential information}}, [[intellectual property]] covers [[copyright]]s, [[patent]]s, [[trade mark]]s, [[property]] rights that arise at [[common law]] (or under [[statute]] ) which can be enforced against all comers, and not simply as as a result of any {{t|contract}}.


For [[intellectual property]] rights to arise there needs, as the name suggests, to be some application of someone's intellect to the creation of the information. Not all information is capable of protection: raw data, for example, isn’t.
For [[intellectual property]] rights to arise there needs, as the name suggests, to be some application of someone's intellect to the creation of the information. Not all information can be protected: raw data, for example, can’t.


{{Copyright and confidence}}
{{premiumsummarygeneral|
===As a paradigm in crisis===
*The difference between copyright and confidence
Is AI the problem, or IP?  
*“Background IP” and “foreground IP”
*AI presenting a crisis for the IP paradigm?}}


IP emerged as a way to allocate resources in an analogue age in which it was impractical to extract abstract “intellectual property” from its [[substrate]]. One could therefore control IP by controlling replication of the substrate. it wasn’t really a “data” problem.
The information revolution (which started with the [[Jacquard loom]]) has changed all that. IP has long struggled with sampling, remixes, digital collaboration and even packet switching<ref>See {{author|Lawrence Lessing}}’s {{br|Code: Version 2.0}}.</ref> (the internet, on several levels, is one collossal transgression/falsification of the idea of [[copyright]]). The emergence of [[AI]] assistance in content generation is a further degeneration of the IP [[paradigm]]. It’s irretrievably broken.
In a digital universe, where you can bifurcate information from [[substrate]], the idea of intellectual property in [[data]] is little more than unjustified state-sponsored monopoly enablement. The [[Rolling Stones]] wrote [[Satisfaction]] in 15, minutes Keith Richards literally while asleep. What justification is there for their exclusive rights to that arrangement of data in (almost) perpetuity?
Ask not how AI fits into the intellectual property rules, therefore, but how we should reimagine the legal framework for the commercial exploitation of data.
{{Ref}}
{{Ref}}

Revision as of 08:21, 28 August 2024

NDA Anatomy™
JC’s guide to non-standard confidentiality agreements.
For the OneNDA, see the OneNDA Anatomy
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

Not to be confused with confidential information, intellectual property covers copyrights, patents, trade marks, property rights that arise at common law (or under statute ) which can be enforced against all comers, and not simply as as a result of any contract.

For intellectual property rights to arise there needs, as the name suggests, to be some application of someone's intellect to the creation of the information. Not all information can be protected: raw data, for example, can’t.


Premium content
Here the free bit runs out. Subscribers click 👉 here. New readers sign up 👉 here and, for ½ a weekly 🍺 go full ninja about all these juicy topics👇
    • The difference between copyright and confidence
    • “Background IP” and “foreground IP”
    • AI presenting a crisis for the IP paradigm?

References