Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Intellectual property: Intellectual property is intangible property that is the result of human creativity. These include inventions, works of literature and art, trademarks and designs. Intellectual property is protected by law in order to ensure that authors and rights holders receive appropriate remuneration for their work and to promote innovation. See also Copyright, Authorship, Literature, Texts, Art, Artworks, Property, Privacy protection._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Experimental Psychology on Intellectual Property - Dictionary of Arguments
Parisi I 117 Intellectual property/Experimental Psychology/Wilkinson-Ryan: Intellectual property implicates a number of non-monetary values. Sprigman, Buccafusco, and Burns (2013)(1) randomly assigned participants in a valuation study to either an attribution or a no-attribution condition, and then asked them what they would require to sell their rights to an original work (in this case, a photograph). Subjects in the Attribution condition gave lower willingness to accept levels than those who were not expecting attribution. >Experiments, >Methods, >Measurement, >Experimental economics. Similarity/artworks/art: Balganesh, Manta, and Wilkinson-Ryan (2014)(2) recently tested the meaning of "substantial similarity" in copyright. We hypothesized that when asked to com- pare two similar creative works, perceived degree of similarity will be affected by extrinsic knowledge about the copying and the parties involved. We found that mere knowledge that one work was a copy of another increased the perception of similarity. Furthermore, when the legal consequences of similarity were made salient to subjects, subjects were sensitive to what we might call "moral" variables. Specifically, subjects were shown two very similar photographs, and randomly assigned to either receive information that either the original had required a high level of labor on the part of the original creator, or that it had been taken with little forethought in a short amount of time. Results: Subjects in the high labor condition found the copy of that photograph more similar to the original than subjects viewing the same two pictures but told that the original had required little labor investment by its creator. >Similarity, >Comparison, >Comparability. 1. Sprigman, Christopher Jon, Christopher Buccafusco, and Zachary Burns (2013). "What's a Name Worth: Experimental Tests of the Value of Attribution in Intellectual Property." Boston University Law Review 93: 1389-1435. 2. Balganesh, Shyamkrishna, Irina D. Manta, and Tess Wilkinson-Ryan (2014). "Judging Similarity." Iowa Law Review 100:267-290. Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess. „Experimental Psychology and the Law“. In: Parisi, Francesco (ed) (2017). The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics. Vol 1: Methodology and Concepts. NY: Oxford University Press_____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Experimental Psychology Parisi I Francesco Parisi (Ed) The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics: Volume 1: Methodology and Concepts New York 2017 |
||
> Counter arguments against Experimental Psychology
> Counter arguments in relation to Intellectual Property
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-29