Essay about Global Impact of Software Patents

Global economics affects the decisions of firms, governments, and individuals in the United State in many different ways. The World Trade Organization manages the rules and trade between nations and has a significant impact on intellectual property rights. Intellectual property rights refer creations of the mind, such as inventions; literary and artistic works; designs; and symbols, names and images used in commerce (World Intellectual Property Organization, 2014). The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast free trade and protectionist theories, analyze how the global environment functions on a micro and macro level within the context of the World Trade Organization, analyze the two-level game theory and how organizations make financial decisions in a globalized environment, and determine which parties benefit from either increasing or decreasing trade restriction.

Protection of intellectual property are investments based on acquired knowledge, thought and effort by one or multiple individuals on behalf of themselves, the business they work for when the property is created, and a financial investment. Each of these – acquired knowledge, thought, physical effort, financial investment – have a value that can be attached as it relates the usefulness or importance of the resulting product. That value will have a level of importance to the individual(s) creating the product and if applicable, the investor providing the funds in support of the creation.

An Introduction to the Law and Economics of Intellectual Property Author(s): Stanley M. Besen and Leo J. Raskind Reviewed work(s): Source: The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Winter, 1991), pp. 3-27 Published by: American Economic Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1942699 . Accessed: 24/11/2011 08:39

Copyrights are more limited in scope than patents. They protect the original works of authorship, not the ideas they contain. In the United States, original works include literary, drama, musical, artistic, and certain other intellectual works. A computer program, for example, is considered a literary work and is protected by copyright. A copyright gives its owner the exclusive right to reproduce and distribute the material or perform or display it publicly. However, copyright law does permit limited reproduction of copyrighted works without the owner 's permission for “fair use” such as criticism, teaching, and news reporting. In the United States, a published work must have a copyright notice, the name

An effective system of intellectual property is important in facilitating innovation as well as economic growth within a country and across all its borders (Davidson, Monoti, Wiseman, 2012). The current global economy is concentrating more in the invention of ideas that are original, other than in manufacturing of machines. To enhance and protect these ideas, there ought to be effective intellectual property laws. The government of Australia has prioritized the protection of original ideas from individuals through copyright, patent, and trademarks among other intelligent property laws, which give the inventor a temporary period to enjoy the financial benefits of his or her original idea. The major purposes of intellectual property laws can be contested; therefore, they create areas of interest for

From a rule utilitarian point of view, from a macroeconomic perspective, granting software patents by giving the exclusive right to sell, use,

Jain, S. C., & Bird, R. (2008). The Global Challenge of Intellectual Property Rights. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Technology enriches our society by making widely available new and useful goods, services, and technical information . Clearly, as a society, we would want to encourage the development of technology so that we can reap the benefits they offer us. Innovators require an incentive to invent and share these technologies with the rest of society. This incentive is achieved by granting intellectual property rights (IPR) to inventors . More specifically, the incentive is usually achieved by granting patents to inventors .

The protection of intellectual property is important and necessary in order to promote progress. The idea is that by trading exclusive rights to the creators of inventions and creative works in exchange that the creative work or invention to be available to the public is mutually beneficial to both the rights holder and society in general. By granting these rights, the creators and owners are able to benefit both socially and financially from that which they created. This provides an incentive for people to pursue the creation of and the investment in intellectual property. There are however limits to the rights of such inventions and creative works.

The World Intellectual Property Organization (n.d.) helps one understand the importance of protecting intellectual property. They have spelled out several reasons of this importance including inventing new works in technology and culture, which allows progress to be made that, can be utilized worldwide. In addition, the legal protection of intellectual property encourages the commitment of additional resources for further modernization. Finally, promoting and protecting intellectual property encourages economic growth. It creates new jobs and industries. Protecting intellectual property also enhances the quality and

Instead of investing money into further research and development, companies and individuals are forced to spend the money on defending lawsuits and buying up patents in order to protect themselves from the Patent Trolls. According to Robin Feldman, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings, unjust patent litigation has an enormous emotional impact on the defendants which are forced to participate in a broken patent system by the NPEs desire, and unmitigated ability, to sue for profit. It's simply extortion, except instead of offering protection from other goons, NPEs offer protection from the government which was supposed to stop them in the first place. The patent law is being used as a tool for legalized

Hello, Mr. Speaker and class; today, we will be discussing the banning of patents. Patents should be stopped, because of two main and very serious reasons that have come to my attention, and today, I will discuss them with you, and make you see the true threat that patent have to us. My first point will be about the economy, and how patents are just too expensive to maintain. My second point is that there may be too much responsibility to be able to keep the patent alive and going. Having patents may seem good at first, but once someone does it for real, they may have already ruined themselves. In fact, somebody can very well ruin themselves before they even finish signing their patents. How? Well, to sign a patent, someone will have to first pay a filing fee that’s from $250 -

IP is becoming increasingly important in the world economy. This can be seen in the increase of patent application and granting. Contrary to the growing IP assets, the market for IP was still con-sidered small and illiquid. Obstacles hindering the uptake of the IP market are:

The core purpose of the patent system is to incentivize innovation but the current system often has the opposite effect. Patents give inventors monopolies over their inventions for a period of time in order to allow inventors to recoup the costs of research and development (“R&D”) and to generate profits that reward inventors’ efforts, encouraging future investment. In exchange, patentees dedicate their inventions to the public domain once their patents expire. The traditional model of patent licensing, whereby a company pays a patent owner to license an invention that a company legitimately uses has been appropriated by non-practicing entities (“patent trolls”) and aggressive patent holders that initiate frivolous lawsuits. Patent trolls often purchase patents from bankrupt companies, for the sole purpose of extorting licensing revenues from organizations that are actually creating new products.

Developing countries may have difficulties in construe the substantive provisions of TRIPS when exploiting TRIPS flexibilities. For instance, article 14 of Brazil 's Industrial Property Law distinguishes less inventive inventions applying a utility model from the “unusual” inventions. The test of inventive step is the “common or usual manner” test, instructing examination should be observed from the view of a person skilled in the art. This provision intends to identify the inventions eligible only for utility model protection from those eligible for both utility model and patent protection. Nevertheless, Dr. Romandini indicates that “the German legislature in 1978 finally abandoned it without significant opposition in the