Cultural, Political, and Social Implications of Intellectual Property Laws in an Informational Economy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shifts towards the commodification of intangible goods – apart from historical means of economic management based on industrial strategies and the creation and sale of physical goods – have made intellectual property rights critical to capitalist accumulation in an increasingly globalized informational economy. In mainstream policy discourses, intellectual policy rights are advanced as a means to provide incentives for creativity and innovation, and to secure economic rewards for investment in research and development while providing a socially optimal level of creative and technological goods. The broader cultural, political, and social implications of the increasing expansion and extension of intellectual property have attracted heightened attention and concern since the 1990s. A discussion of the historical justifications for intellectual property in Western legal traditions is followed by a consideration of how these laws increasingly shape conditions of culture and communication. We show how the trade-based expansion of intellectual property has reoriented the traditional balance between private property rights and public interests, further entrenching historic inequalities and providing new obstacles to the realization of development and human rights in the global South, while reinforcing the marginalization of non-Western states, peoples, and cultures. The impact of intellectual property on access to medicine, health care, education, agriculture, and the preservation of food security, and biodiversity, illustrates the dangers of expanding intellectual property rights without consideration of public interests or the desirability of securing basic public goods. Responses to these debates demonstrate the need for - and the emergence of – new coalitions of states, activists, and critics able to forge a new politics of intellectual property that better balances private and public rights while furthering human rights and sustainable development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".