Institutional capacity and implementation issues in farmers' rights

Armed with the ���equity��� and ���conservation��� arguments that have a deep resonance with farming communities, developing countries are crafting a range of measures designed to protect farmers��� access to innovations, reward their contributions to the conservation and enhancement of plant genetic resources and provide incentives for sustained on-farm conservation. These measures range from the commericialization of farmers��� varieties to the conferment of a set of legally enforceable rights on farming communities ��� the exercise of which is expected to provide economic rewards to those responsible for on-farm conservation and innovation. The rights-based approach has been the cornerstone of legislative provision for implementing farmers��� rights in most developing countries. In drawing up these measures, developing countries do not appear to have systematically examined or provided for the substantial institutional capacity required for the effective implementation of farmers��� rights provisions. The lack of institutional capacity threatens to undermine any prospect of serious implementation of these provisions. More importantly, the expectation that significant incentives for on-farm conservation and innovation will flow from these ���rights��� may be based on a flawed understanding of the economics of intellectual property rights. While farmers��� rights may provide only limited rewards for conservation, they may still have the effect of diluting the incentives for innovative institutional breeding programs ��� with the private sector increasingly relying on non-IPR instruments to profit from innovation. The focus on a rights-based approach may also draw attention away from alternative stewardship-based approaches to the realization of farmers��� rights objectives.

Intellectual Property Protection : an External Factor that Influences a Foreign Company���s Market Entry Mode into a Prospective Market

Intellectual Property Protection is been understood in this paper as IP laws and enforcement of these laws in order to protect intellectual property rights. The goal of this research work is to understand how Swedish companies view issues regarding to Intellectual Property Protection (IPP) and how it influences a foreign company?s market entry mode. In order to achieve this objective, the Nigerian market situation and its? laws that govern IPP will be used to analyzed this issue. This paper argues that IPP is an important factor that influences a company?s entry mode and this argument finds IP laws and enforcement as two variables that influence the market while the market situation influences the foreign company. In carrying out this research literature was reviewed and interviews carried out. The research methodology section has presented a qualitative research and explains the nature of the interview stages that have been used to achieve the goals concerning the findings of the empirical data. A qualitative method was adopted by carrying out in-depth semi-structured interviews. The empirical data collected from the investigation were gathered and analyzed based on the research questions. The findings show that IPP of a host market influences a potential foreign company through the market situation that is also influenced by IP laws and enforcement. The outcome of these findings argues that the Swedish companies that were interviewed in this research will enter the Nigerian market through an intermediary mode. This has been based on the current IPP system of Nigerian.

Access to knoledge in Brazil: new research on intellectual property, innovation and development

The present volume is the fruit of a research initiative on Access to Knowledge begun in 2004 by Yochai Benkler, Eddan Katz, and myself. Access to Knowledge is both a social movement and an approach to international and domestic policy. In the present era of globalization, intellectual property and information and communications technology are major determinants of wealth and power. The principle of access to knowledge argues that we best serve both human rights and economic development through policies that make knowledge, knowledge-creating tools, and nowledgeembedded goods as widely available as possible for decentralized innovation and use. Open technological standards, a balanced approach to intellectual property rights, and expansion of an open telecommunications infrastructure enable ordinary people around the world to benefit from the technological advances of the information age and allow them to generate a vibrant, participatory and democratic culture. Law plays a crucial role in securing access to knowledge, determining whether knowledge and knowledge goods are shared widely for the benefit of all, or controlled and monopolized for the benefit of a few.

Sui Generis Rights for the Protection of Traditional Cultural Expressions Policy Implications

Within the international community there have been many calls for better protection of traditional cultural expressions (TCEs), for which classic instruments of intellectual property rights do not seem to fit. In response, at least five model laws have been advanced within the last 40 years. These are referred to as sui generis because, though they generally belong to the realm of intellectual property they structurally depart from classic copyright law to accommodate the needs of the holders of TCEs. The purpose of this paper is to provide a well-founded basis for national policy makers who wish to implement protection for TCEs within their country. This is achieved by systematically comparing and evaluating economic effects that can be expected to result from these regulatory alternatives and a related system or private ordering. Specifically, we compare if and how protection preferences of local communities are met as well as the social costs that are likely to arise from the different model laws.

Internet Intermediaries and the Law Applicable to Intellectual Property Infringements

The coordination between territoriality restricted intellectual property rights and the potential global reach of Internet activities has been the focus of significant attention in recent years. The liability of Internet intermediaries offering potentially global services that may facilitate infringements of intellectual property rights by others in multiple countries poses a particular challenge in that regard. At a substantive law level, significant differences remain between jurisdictions regarding secondary liability for intellectual property rights infringements and safe harbor provisions for Internet intermediaries. The present article discusses the conflict of laws aspects of the liability of Internet intermediaries in light of the recent international efforts to adopt soft law provisions on intellectual property and private international law.

Information as Property

Information is widely regarded as one of the key concepts of modern society. The production, distribution and use of information are some of the key aspects of modern economies. Driven by technological progress information has become a good in its own right. This established an information economy and challenged the law to provide an apt framework suitable to promote the production of information, enable its distribution and efficient allocation, and deal with the risks inherent in information technology. Property rights are a major component of such a framework. However, information as an object of property rights is not limited to intellectual property but may also occur as personality aspects or even tangible property. Accordingly, information as property can be found in the area of intellectual property, personality protection and other property rights. This essay attempts to categorize three different types of information that can be understood as a good in the economic sense and an object in the legal sense: semantic information, syntactic information and structural information. It shows how legal ownership of such information is established by different subjective rights. In addition the widespread debate regarding the justification of intellectual property rights is demonstrated from the wider perspective of informational property in general. Finally, in light of current debates, this essay explores whether ���data producers��� shall have a new kind of property right in data.

Rezension zu: Inge Govaere and Hanns Ulrich (eds.): Intellectual Property, Public Policy and International Trade

The contemporary intellectual property rights (IPR) system is not a simple, smoothly working block of rules but is complex and full of ambiguities, and as many argue, imperfections. Some deficits relate on the one hand to the inherent centrality of authorship, originality and mercantilism to the ���Western��� IP model, which leaves numerous non-Western, collaborative or folkloric modes of production outside the scope of protection. On the other hand, some imperfections stem from the way IPR are granted, whereby creators acquire a temporary monopoly over their works and thus exclude the public from having access to them. In this sense, it is often uncertain whether the existent IPR model appropriately reflects the precarious balance between private and public interests, and whether the best incentives to promote creativity and innovation - the initially stated objectives of intellectual property protection - are offered. The matter becomes still more complicated when one considers that the IPR system is not domestically contained but is globalised and strongly affected by rules at the regional and international levels. The question of whether the balance between private interests and public values is sustained within the international legal framework, epitomised by the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) of the World Trade Organization (WTO), is precisely the topic of the book reviewed here. Review of Intellectual Property, Public Policy, and International Trade, edited by Inge Govaere and Hanns Ullrich, P.I.E. Peter Lang, 2007.

Property Law

This chapter examines the economics of property rights and property law. Property law is a fundamental part of social organization and is also fundamental to the operation of the economy because it defines and protects the bundle of rights that constitute property. Property law thereby creates incentives to protect and invest in assets and establishes a legal framework within which market exchange of assets can take place. The purpose of this chapter is to show how the economics of property rights can be used to understand fundamental features of property law and related extra-legal institutions. The chapter will both examine the rationale for legal doctrine and the effects of legal doctrine regarding the exercise, enforcement, and transfer of rights. It will also examine various property rights regimes including open access, private ownership, common property and state property. The guiding questions are: How are property rights established? What explains the variation in the types of property rights? What governs the use and transfer of rights? And, how are property rights enforced?

Water rights for variable supplies

The relative merits of different systems of property rights to allocate water among different extractive uses are evaluated for the case where variability of supply is important. Three systems of property rights are considered. In the first, variable supply is dealt with through the use of water entitlements defined as shares of the total quantity available. In the second, there are two types of water entitlements, one for water with a high security of supply and the other a lower security right for the residual supply. The third is a system of entitlements specified as state-contingent claims. With zero transaction costs, all systems are efficient. In the realistic situation where transaction costs matter, the system based on state-contingent claims is globally optimal, and the system with high-security and lower security entitlements is preferable to the system with share entitlements.

The value of intellectual property to firms and society

Economists view intellectual property rights (IPRs) as policy tools for encouraging innovation, but they recognize that they can also inhibit competition. There are many types of IPRs and institutions concerned with their administration. We begin by outlining how these complex and varied rights are supposed to work and how they interact with other characteristics of firms and markets. We then survey the available literature on patents, trade marks, and copyright to assess the value of these IPRs to firms and the costs to firms of acquiring and defending their rights. The paper concludes with suggestions for topics requiring further research to inform public policy better.

Innovation, intellectual property and economic growth

What drives innovation? How does it contribute to the growth of firms, industries, and economies? And do intellectual property rights help or hurt innovation and growth? Uniquely combining microeconomics, macroeconomics, and theory with empirical analysis drawn from the United States and Europe, this book introduces graduate students and advanced undergraduates to the complex process of innovation. By addressing all the major dimensions of innovation in a single text, Christine Greenhalgh and Mark Rogers are able to show how outcomes at the microlevel feed through to the macro-outcomes that in turn determine personal incomes and job opportunities. In four sections, this textbook comprehensively addresses the nature of innovation and intellectual property, the microeconomics and macroeconomics of innovation, and economic policy at the firm and macroeconomic levels. Among the topics fully explored are the role of intellectual property in creating incentives to innovate; the social returns of innovation; the creation and destruction of jobs by innovation; whether more or fewer intellectual property rights would give firms better incentives to innovate; and the contentious issues surrounding international treaties on intellectual property.

Intellectual property asset management:how to identify, protect, manage and exploit intellectual property within the business environment

In the new ���knowledge-intensive economies��� Intellectual assets increasingly play a key part on balance sheets. There is an increasing global awareness that in order to promote innovation and the growth of the economy, businesses must fully recognise and exploit their intellectual assets. A company���s ability to innovate rapidly and successfully is now regarded as essential and most breakthroughs are made by Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), usually with no in-house legal professionals to help them. It is essential that those working with or creating intellectual property rights (IPR) are aware of the basics of Intellectual Property Law. Intellectual Property Asset Management provides business and management students at all levels with an accessible-straight-forward explanation of what the main Intellectual Property rights are and how these rights are protected. Locating the subject squarely in a business context and using case studies and examples throughout drawn from a wide range of business organisations, it explains how an organisation can exploit their rights through licensing, franchising and other means in order to make the best possible use of their IP assets. This book will provide students with: ��� the basic Intellectual Property law knowledge needed to identify a potential IP issue ��� the tools and understanding to assess an IP breach ��� the ability to identify where the problem cannot be solved in house and where expert legal assistance is required ��� the knowledge required to work effectively with lawyers and other legal professionals to achieve the desired outcome

A Best Practice Process for Fleet Safety Training

This paper outlines a process for fleet safety training based on research and management development programmes undertaken at the University of Huddersfield in the UK (www.hud.ac.uk/sas/trans/transnews.htm) and CARRS-Q in Australia (www.carrsq.qut.edu.au/staff/Murray.jsp) over the past 10 years.