Del 57 i serien Cambridge Intellectual Property and Information Law

A Critique of the Ontology of Intellectual Property Law

Inbunden, Engelska, 2021

AvAlexander Peukert

1 719 kr

Beställningsvara. Skickas inom 7-10 vardagar. Fri frakt för medlemmar vid köp för minst 249 kr.

Finns i fler format (1)

Häftad

449 kr

Skickas inom 7-10 vardagar

Intellectual property (IP) law operates with the ontological assumption that immaterial goods such as works, inventions, and designs exist, and that these abstract types can be owned like a piece of land. Alexander Peukert provides a comprehensive critique of this paradigm, showing that the abstract IP object is a speech-based construct, which first crystalised in the eighteenth century. He highlights the theoretical flaws of metaphysical object ontology and introduces John Searle's social ontology as a more plausible approach to the subject matter of IP. On this basis, he proposes an IP theory under which IP rights provide their holders with an exclusive privilege to use reproducible 'Master Artefacts.' Such a legal-realist IP theory, Peukert argues, is both descriptively and prescriptively superior to the prevailing paradigm of the abstract IP object. This work was originally published in German and was translated by Gill Mertens.

Produktinformation

Utgivningsdatum2021-05-20
Mått230 x 150 x 15 mm
Vikt460 g
FormatInbunden
SpråkEngelska
SerieCambridge Intellectual Property and Information Law
Antal sidor218
FörlagCambridge University Press
ISBN9781108498326
ÖversättareGill Mertens

Tillhör följande kategorier

Immaterialrätt inom Juridik

'A Critique of the Ontology of Intellectual Property Law presents a radical reassessment of contemporary IP law. Alexander Peukert argues that the abstract property model upon which the law rests is fake. He traces the historical development of this model and demonstrates its tendency to support commodification, before proposing an alternative, more materialist form of regulation for the products of creativity and inventiveness. This erudite book throws down an important challenge to common assumptions and therefore deserves close attention from all scholars of IP law.' Jonathan Griffiths, Queen Mary University of London