Wed Apr 2, Intellectual property

This coming Wednesday, we will discuss intellectual property.

The concept of intellectual property, whether it is copyright to artwork and music, invention patents, or movies and software, have been instrumental in encouraging and supporting original thinking in the last century or so.

While copying was rampant before and still is in some parts of the world, the protection of intellectual property rights allow major investments in research and the making of movies before any possibility of income is ever realized.

The potential reward of a big payoff brought investors into supporting these efforts.

However, recent cultural values seem to have shifted.

The internet model of free software encourages group development efforts rather than the proprietary development by a single developer.  It can be argued that people get inspired by ideas from others and the open offering of development from a free initial platform results in a much faster development and a more varied one.

The ease of downloading and copying music and videos on line also caused traditional distribution channels to lose revenue and artists to not get royalties from their work.

The younger generation complain of Hollywood and large drug companies making megabucks through intellectual properties,  that the movie is already made, the drug is already developed and the cost of making additional copies are way less than what is being charged.

Some say that intellectual property promotes monopoly and that it is not theft in that there is not tangible loss to the owner in copying an idea.

Even intellectuals complain of ideas being throttled by intellectual property owners and there is no longer free exchange of ideas any more.

The patenting of genetics raise complains of commercialization and ownership of living organisms.  How can anyone own a living thing whether it is a genetically modified seed or bacteria?

On the other hand, if we do trim back on the range on the ownership of intellectual property, how do we continue to encourage entrepreneurship without the promise of financial payoff for a success?

Why should someone finance the millions to make a movie if no one will pay after the first copy?

Should the length of patent periods be reduced or extended?

What is the definition of intellectual property that will encourage new thinking without limiting others to build on the idea?