Abstract
Intellectual property (IP) has become a crucial factor in scientific knowledge production which is based predominantly on profits and market relations facilitated by Intellectual property rights (IPRs). The result of this production is a ‘proprietary knowledge’, i.e. an over-patented knowledge which cannot be legally used or produced without the right holder’s consent. This work aims to ‘reopen’ the debate about IP recalling the ‘knowledge commons’ argument in order to affirm a diversity of ownership definitions, e.g. individual, multiple, collaborative, communitarian and public. The article introduces a brief analyse about the philosophy underlying IP – from authors such as Locke, Hegel and Marx – for a critical appraisal of theoretical and social aspects of knowledge property. The discussion presented about contemporary IP and its consequences for scientific production, includes the study of a biopiracy case involving the Waoranis, an Ecuadorean indigenous community, as an example of the ‘over-patenting’ of life and knowledge. Thus, in favour of the ‘knowledge commons’ argument, the paradigmatic case about the donation of the malaria vaccine patent is revised to show that it is possible to organise a scientific production guided by alternative criteria. The methodology used was the critical revision of primary bibliography and academic literature.
Highlights
Intellectual property (IP) has become a crucial factor in scientific knowledge production
The analysis presented is a historical review but a critical appraisal of the theoretical and social aspects of property without which intellectual property rights (IPRs) would not have their current configuration
The balance that Trade Related aspects of Intellectual Property rights (TRIPs) attempts to settle is expressed through time limits and exceptions to IPRs, exceptions and terms are discretionally applied by World Trade Organisation (WTO) members affecting in greater quantity to developing countries whose enforcement capacity against imitation and illegal appropriation is weaker
Summary
Intellectual property (IP) has become a crucial factor in scientific knowledge production. Knowledge is created within social structures based predominantly on profits and market relations which are facilitated by IP legislation that protects innovation from imitation and robbery through intellectual property rights (IPRs). The whole process of innovation is ‘encapsulated’ by proprietary knowledge in the form of the invention which is commercialised in the market This economic mind-set has led scientific production to look for profits in ever-increasing fields and practices. The restrictions created by IPRs hinder scientific innovation since inventions cannot be accessed nor improved for extended periods. The case about the donation of the ‘malaria vaccine patent’ is examined to show that it is possible to organise a scientific production guided by alternative criteria, such as social interest, sustainability, collaboration, availability, accessibility, and transferability. The article suggests that the most important aspect for ‘knowledge commons’ is that it ‘reopens’ the debate about IP allowing the construction of diverse ownership definitions
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
