Enterprise Knowledge Management: Internet and Intellectual Property Rights - Term Paper Example

KM The universality of intellectuality, in that it is valid for each individual intellect, brings about an atomization of society. By means of the intellect and viewed from its standpoint, everyone seems to be an enclosed self-sufficient element alongside every other, without this abstract universality in which the individual person only forms a unity in combination with others (Georg Simmel, The Philosophy of Money) INTRODUCTION The current century in the history of humanity has presented an outstanding feat that is uniquely its own and totally unknown to other centuries prior to it - the creation of a global community. At the onset, this may appear to be ordinary and nothing to be astounded about. But if one starts to look at the underlying principles that govern and control the global community, one will see that its inception and coming to be is maintained and harnessed, even made possible, by the fast phase changes and developments in the field of technology. Being such, it has been perceived that if one is to appraise technological advancement as progressing in such an accelerated rate wherein one may get lost in midst of rapid technological changes, one has not to loss hope. Though, confusing and baffling it may seem the beauty of technology lies on the fact that with the availability and accessibility of knowledge and information, nobody ought to be left behind. Instead everybody can become a partaker and sharer in the highway of knowledge. But what really can it do and where will it take humanity? INTERNET: THE INFORMATION HIGHWAY If global economy is that which defines the world market, the easy access to information has been made feasible by the presence of Internet. Internet is basically the tool with which “access to the content and services preferred by one organization” (Housel and Bell, 2001, p 114) is opened and made within reach for those individual person and organizations who may want to know and be informed. By itself, it can be claimed that Internet, being part of the developments in modern technology, is in effect a lot of help to all its users. Students by merely surfing the net can find articles and books that he/she may need for researches or for examinations. A housewife going over the services offered in the Internet will no longer have to go to the tiring routine of going to all the banks for the payments and visiting the supermarkets for the groceries. Since, at the mere push of the keyboard of the computer one can, via Internet, shop and pay all the utility bills, thus, unburdening humanity of some basic concerns. One can itemize benefit per benefit the gains that we can derived from the Internet. Though, it cannot be denied that there are already many abuses in the use of internet yet still what remains is the fact that internet has basically fashioned the human world in such a way that it is constantly connected, informed and in a way happy. But what really interests us is “how can Internet help an organization in sharing knowledge?” The moment that we have directed our focus to organization, one is basically thrust into a new and more complex appreciation of what Internet may possibly do or offer. Although, it may be assumed that technically an organization is an individual, still it is not a human being. Though its entirety is made up of people who grouped themselves and have become part of the structure of the organization, pursuing the same vision and aiming for the same goal, the outlook on internet is no longer the same with that of the wife or the student. And this is for the simple reason that there is already the assumption that the moment that we start referring to the use of internet in organizations what comes to the fore front of the human mind is the idea that access to information is no longer limited to managerial positions or high level positions but is now made accessible to all the members of the organization. But over and above that, the notion that with the presence of Internet there is a concrete “infrastructure” (p112) that opens the playing field for exchange and sharing of ideas among and between companies creates the environment for sharing ideas. However, when organizations speak of sharing of ideas, it is not merely passing the buck or the sheet information to the other. When organizations “share ideas” they are technically “identifying problems and thinking together about how to resolve them – i.e .”sympathizing” – and putting ideas into action – i.e “responding” – creates value” (Takeuchi and Nanoka, 2004, p 221). But as organizations share ideas and become collaborators among themselves, they not only present innovations and innovative ideas that have a far-reaching influence in the society but that they at the same time foster competition among themselves. Take the case of collaboration that is observable among computer companies in combating viruses and other forms of sabotage through the virtual space. One being embarked by INTEL CORP., HEWLETT-PACKARD CO., IBM CORP. and other players is the collaboration between differing computer systems without human interaction. This particular endeavor is known as “P2P”(Serban and Luan, 2002, p 87). Or take the example on how European and Japanese companies take on collaborative works with university researches. It’s been claimed that both European and Japanese pharmaceutical, chemical-pharmaceutical and electronic sector collaborating with university researches. And that this has been the dominant practice in the 80’s. Thus it was not really unexpected when during that particular period there was a surge in the scientific publication most of which were sponsored by multinational companies. (Gibbons, Limoges, Nowotny, et al, 1994, p 144- 145). The point in the end is that the collaboration that is transpiring among and between companies is no longer just merely a lip service on the part of either parties but it is really seen as a way of upholding the prominent belief among transnational and multinational companies that as they go global there is already the necessity of being open to the dynamics not only of the tradition and culture of the organization but to all the factors that will help the organization be more able reaching its vision and mission and ascertaining that it will be able to fulfill and reach its goal. This very important matter should not be relegated to the periphery of the life of the organization since, the very idea of collaboration happening in the inter-organization level via the use of the infrastructure known and called as internet presents the viability and feasibility of various organizations though dissimilar in nature, of coming together and creating innovative inventions and materials that will help humanity. This again, presents a deconstructed appreciation of the nature of organization. Since, the moment that companies agree to open themselves to other companies in collaborative work, they are basically opening themselves to the risk of being over taken by the company that they have collaborated with. For the reason that they may develop further innovations out of the collaborative work. I am not saying that this is wrong. In fact, I think that this kind of environment is good since it keeps companies on its toes and continuously challenges organizations to be up and about, always at the look out for better and more interesting materials and innovation. Thus, this will paved the way for a more robust and healthy competition between and among organizations and companies. But at the same time, it keep companies constantly taking a glance back at his shoulder (if it’s a race) if the other companies are already near him. But on the other hand, it may seem odd that organizations will be moving together not really solely as competitors in the field of business but rather as partners in the quest for good life and competitors also at the same time in the realm of the market. This important point gives us a picture of the shrinking world with all movements in the realm of knowledge whether in business or academe geared towards the creation of a more humane world. Perhaps I am incorrect in my perception but then it takes a dual characteristics that allows it to be a partner in research yet at the same time a competitor in business. But then in the midst of the sharing of ideas that is transpiring among and between organizations, sometimes one cannot help but asked one’s self, how or in what way can we know that we have not just merely copied an existing idea already. This is important since with the outset of information highway, when sharing ideas is the in thing among companies and organizations how can one claim that the idea is originally hers? Originally in the sense that he/she is the person who first conceptualized the idea. INTELLECTUALPROPERTY RIGHTS In recognition of the possibility that rightful accord be not given to the inventor or originator of the idea, World Trade Organization has come up with a round-table discussion regarding what they call “intellectual property rights.” This particular concern with regards to the status of who is the “real owner’ of the concept/idea is of vast importance in the global market since in the helm of globalization anybody can claim that he/she is first on something. But what is intellectual property right? In the ordinary or common understanding of property, a property normally connotes the idea that there is an object that is possessed or owned by an individual. And when we refer to the object as being owned or possessed by a particular individual, the owner technically has the right over the object to do anything to it - object – in any manner that please him as long as within the boundaries of laws. What I mean is that the owner has the right to dispose, keep, sell, give or do anything to it that the owner wants to do over the object. (Of course all actions done on the property should be within the parameters of the law) But what I would like to stress here is not the idea that the owner technically has power over his/her property but the notion that normally when we ordinarily speak of property we are more or less referring to tangible materials that can be perceived. For example, Bill Gates owning one of the largest companies in the world and that he has billions and billions of money at his disposal that falls part of his properties. But not his intellectual property. Why? Because intellectual property pertains to intangible, immaterial properties like the score of music, formula for a particular theory in quantum physics, a new invention, a new program in the computer and other similar stuffs. Thus, aside from the basic difference between an intellectual property and an ordinary property – the first being intangible and the latter being tangible – what holds the two together is the notion that it is still a property and that there is a rightful owner recognized by law over it. As such, it is but necessary that the global world should also look after the owners of these intellectual properties which is a lot harder to secure and protect since it is intangible. For example, plagiarism is an immoral and one of the penultimate sins that a person in the academe can and may commit. For the reason that the conception of plagiarism presents the notion that you have stolen the work of another person. That by not rightfully recognizing the source and the author of one’s information one is already stealing. Plagiarism is a form of stealing because what happens under it is that you may others assume and believe that what you have written is wholesale yours. Yours in the sense that you have developed the ideas in you paper out of the analysis of the reading materials that one may have. The non-recognition of the author or source of information is a denial of the fact that the idea is not really yours and that there is someone before you who has thought and written about it. For me, it is merely a simple case of respect to the one who really developed the ideas. There is no need for a writer of any paper that there is a need or necessity for her/him to come up with an excellent paper so get the works of others and not recognized your source to make it appear that it is yours. In all honesty, I would rather revised and revised my paper - my paper. Rather than make it appear that I have a grand idea, a good writer well in fact I am sham. This particular sentiment also holds when we start dealing with the case of “piracy” of dvds, mp3s and the like. It is literally stealing the woks of other persons. In a film, many people have put in their talents, money and effort in coming up with the movie. And what “pirates “ do is that after the release or even during the release of the movie they get hold of the copy of the movie and then they recopy it which they then sell in a lower price. It is simple stealing. Stealing because others have basically invested much on it. But, the legitimate investors themselves cannot really benefit and reap all the fruits of their sweat since the “pirates” have taken a chunk of it by illegitimately producing a copy of a movie, a song, a concert which they did not invest on. With these new forms of stealing in the global village, global market it is but apt to come up with a clearer definition and understanding of intellectual property rights. But the thing is this. As the infrastructure of information highway is such that the exchange and sharing of ideas in the Internet is as fast as the movement of gravitons, how can we still protect and secure our intellectual properties? In my analysis of the current predicament regarding intellectual property right, it seems that the world has not yet really come up with a viable solution that will minimize or even eliminate the abuses on IPR. In the academe, perhaps, they may have come up with techniques on how to detect plagiarism, on piracy they may have created and imposed stiffer laws and penalties on those persons who are caught involved in such a nefarious act. Perhaps as the boundaries of countries become malleable because of globalization, each countries has realized at the same time for the need to implement stricter procedures and laws upon entering into their area of responsibility. But the same stiffer and stricter rules may not find haven in the Internet. The virtual space being a “virtual space” is governed by different dynamics, different characteristics. As such what ought to be done is the filtering of the data is traveling in the Internet. That the players of this medium should learn to police themselves since nobody can really control the influx of information in the Internet. But human beings are not mere captives of this reality. CONCLUSION The reality of Internet in the lives not merrily of individual persons but of organizations as well is something that we can no longer discount as unimportant. The fact that Internet is seen as the venue where sharing of ideas among and between countries is made feasible is already a big opportunity not only for organizations to further developed their companies via partnership with other organizations. But, it will also posit as a continuous challenge for each organization to continuously innovative and not to let itself lagged behind. Yet at the same time, one must always be on the guard whether there id indeed a sharing of ideas that is transpiring or there is stealing of intellectual properties already. The line that separates the two is very thin. And in threading that line the question is no longer about data or information gained but rather the question is lodged on the ethical principle of the human being that trekking the line. The battle to protect IPR is not yet won. Trudging on IPR may and still assumes the face of “sharing of ideas.” But the two are not the same. Trampling on IPR is an atrocity in itself that may cause death, while sharing ideas is life enhancing, enabling man to pursue and continue dream of the good life. REFERENCES: Ahmed, P., Kok, L.K. and Loh, A Y E. (2002). Learning through knowledge management. Oxford: ButterWorth Heinemann. Davenport, T., and Probst, G. J. B. ( 2002). Knowledge management: case book best practises. Germany: John Wiley &Sons. Gibbons, M, Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S. Scott, P. and Trow, M., (1994). The production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Londodn: Sage Publications. Hatch, M.J. (1997). Organization Theory: modern symbolic and postmodern perspectives. New York::Oxford University Press. Milner, E.M. (2000). Managing information and knowledge in the public sector. London: Routledge. Morey, D., Maybury, M., and Thuraisingham, B. eds. (2002). Knowledge management:classic and contemporary works. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Newell, S., Robertson, M., Scarbrough, H. and Swan, J. (2002). Managing knowledge work. New York: Palgrave. Serban, A. and Luan, J. eds. (2002). Knowledge management: building advantage in higher education. CA:Jossey-BASS. Takeuchi, H., and Nonaka, I. (2004). Hitotsubashi on knowledge management: hitotsubashi university graduate school of international corporate strategy. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons ( Asia) Pte Ltd. Read More