英语论文网

or an efficient functioning market and that being first in the market provides sufficient appropriability that no legal protection is required. 8 Recently, with the advent of internet technology, it is argued that copyright law gives undue credit to authors and investors, and functions to restrict the free flow of information that would otherwise benefit everyone. 9 In response to these copyright criticisms, three basic arguments are proffered for conferring exclusive rights to the expression of an idea: natural rights arguments, reward arguments and utilitarian arguments. Although the three arguments are relatively distinct in philosophical paradigm, they are typically deployed side by side.10

 

Natural rights arguments

 

Natural rights arguments are framed in two ways: the personality theory which is associated with European traditions and Locke's labour theory which is strongly represented in the American literature. It is suggested that the latter one is not complete without the support of the former one.  The personality theory such as the one proposed by Hegel regards a creation as an extension of its creator's individuality or person, belonging to that creator as part of his or her selfhood. Hegel's normative relationship between property and personhood is reformulated by Radin. She argues that intellectual property rights are justifiable as manifestation of one's personality in one's intellectual creation, “the more closely connected with personhood the stronger the entitlement”.  With this understanding, intellectual property is protected because intellectual products, even the most technical, are a receptacle of personality.

 

Locke's labour theory argues that the people have natural rights to enjoy the fruits of their labour by creating something from raw material even when labours are intellectual.

 

According to Locke's labour theory, labour justifies a penetration of a physical item into the labourer's ambit in the sense that the labour adds value to the raw material. 16 But the exercise of labour's natural rights is not unconditional, it is subject to the “no-harm principle”17, the “enough and as good proviso” 16and the “non-waste proviso” . The “no-harm” principle ensures that the labour's natural property rights are protected only if it does not conflict with social norms and common good. The “enough and as good” principle secures that property acquisition harms no one and intellectual commons are accessible to everyone. The non-waste principle prohibits Man to spoil or destroy anything made by god, so a labourer may appropriate only the amount that he can come to use.

 

The Lockean provisos were reconstructed by Nozick. Under his reconstruction, the exclusive rights of an intellectual property owner over his idea would better off the public, because other good and services developed from that idea are still available on the market.If so, there is no need for the idea/expression dichot本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。