Intellectual Property Protection - Essay Example

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION By Location Introduction Intellectual property de s original ideas from the mind, emanating from the innovative potential of an individual. Such property can be protected under the law for registration and penalties. Some known examples of intellectual property include, trademarks, literary work, company logos, patent, copyright, creative art, independent discoveries names and images. Intellectual property can be described as an intangible property and cannot be discussed in terms of physical presence. Therefore, intellectual property is the ownership of a concept by an individual out of their own creativity, rather than the ownership of an estate or a piece of land or just a tangible material. Just like any real property, the intellectual property can also be sold. Additionally, intellectual property is owned by the person or persons that came up with the concept or ideas first. The reason why the intellectual property is bound by law is to exclude other people from using the intellectual property at hand without the owner’s consent, or depending on the law, the owner may protect against anybody using their ideas for financial purposes. This paper will discuss whether the intellectual property protection is beneficial, or whether it is a hindrance to innovation. The intellectual effort of an individual should be protected against abuse by other people or organizations. Protection acts as an incentive to the innovator, and inspires them to continue with their original work, and this improves the living standards of the innovator, and consequently propels the economic development of any nation (Ahearn 2012, p. 45). Intellectual property is very important to capitalists because this helps companies to become unique and very competitive as well as enhancing the economic growth, of the innovator, the investor and the entire nation (Bernstein 2010, p. 72). Role of intellectual property rights and protection Intellectual property plays a very important role in the economic development and stability of states and nations. Most individual innovators and companies rely on the legal protection of their intelligent quality products for financial growth and constancy. Intellectual property plays a major role in the employment sector, with known intelligent quality companies creating jobs to millions of young innovators across the world (Sichelman 2010, p 347). Studies have shown that the employees in the intelligent property companies earn 30% more compared to their counterparts in other companies therefore creating a financial stability and satisfaction (Puric, Puric, & Vlaskovic 2013, p. 430). Enforced laws on the intellectual property protect the consumers by enabling them to make a sense of the quality and the effectiveness of their products for purchase. These laws therefore ensure the authenticity of products and create an ease of mind to the consumers since they rely on the market products. Intellectual property offers such a strong breakthrough to the world challenges in the health sector, in fact, the innovative medical companies bring forth products that stimulate the growth for new drugs (Radenković-Jocić & Mladenović 2012, p. 350). Consequently, intellectual property ensures the manufacturing of high quality vaccinations and drugs. The fact that intellectual property provides an inducement for innovation to curb market failures, it spurs sustainable market stability through the provision of incentives that encourage new innovations and creativity. In addition, intelligence property rules and regulations helps create new markets and this is because they are tradable and transferable (Pugh 2013, p. 297). In the 21st century, intellectual property dictates the innovative developments and the economic growth in almost all the sectors which is thus essential in creating new jobs, financial satisfactions, problem solving tool, safeguarding our environment and enhancing security. In order to achieve the 99% of the above mentioned sectors, the government should provide incentives for the continued growth of innovations that will make the society, as Newton described, “to stand on the shoulders of geniuses.” The intellectual property rights show respect and appreciation or giving credit to an individual’s work of creativity and this allows an individual to benefit from their work. These laws also govern the innovator’s power of monopoly and also how their work of creativity is accessible to the public. Companies too generate revenue through the protection of its intellectual property. This is achieved when a company’s employees use imagination and creativity to develop or manufacture new products (Mets et al 2007, p. 33). Interestingly, there are ways through which identified and protected intellectual property can provide valuable and competitive advantages to a company’s revenue, these ways include; The company’s decision to practice the intellectual property The company may also decide to exclude others from practicing some intellectual properties or The company can decide to license the intelligence quality and this could be achieved through legal proceedings, enforcing and maximizing on the value of the intelligence quality (Encouraging Innovation: An Overview of Performance and Policies 2006, p. 66). Intellectual property protection, therefore encourages the issuing, diffusion and the revelation of any form of creativity to the entire public rather than it being kept in secrecy (Campbell, Huang, & Luckraz 2012, p. 80). Intellectual Property protection as a constraint to innovation Innovation is a key factor in the economic growth but the competition in the market can motivate a negative influence because of the higher nature of the number of good inventions. Innovations grow from the known by developing it to new (Carlaw et al 2006, p. 640). Therefore, innovators create new ideas from existing innovations from old ones. Due to the drastic emergence of competitions in the market, most companies preserve their innovative work in secrecy thereby impeding the growth of creativity and development of new ideas from the old ones. Most companies tap talented innovators but with a major interest of harnessing their benefits and attain a public benefit from someone’s innovations. Company’s concealment of their closed creativity hinders positive innovations by blocking new ideas (Asongu 2013, p. 48). A further illustration on how intellectual property protection is a constraint of innovation can further be illustrated as follows in a simple market competition between innovator “A” and “B”. “A” wants to freely access B’s innovations, but innovator as products are protected. That brings a conflict between the two innovators, and B may also be tempted to block A from accessing his products. Consequently, such a scenario creates a conflict of desire between the two innovators and in the long run, they both limit their innovations from each other. Intellectual property protection, especially the copy write can be used as a tool to impede the dissemination or access to information and knowledge (Budde-Sung 2013, p. 350). For instance, with so much plagiarism and piracy, the publisher maintain profits by selling expensive quality material like films and books to the rich and the poor material to the rest of the world (Ghio 2011, p. 55). Innovation and communal development are achieved over time because information is not limited. Intellectual property protection makes ideas and information look like a scare commodity and creates a monopoly. Any form of development is propelled by information and knowledge and therefore, intellectual protection laws have been viewed as a knowledge limiting tool (Cotropia 2010, p. 921). Innovation is said to go through three stages, whereby, an individual possesses a unique cognition and benefits from it, other people within the community imitate and share the profit or improve the initial idea thereby reducing the profits which thereby inspires new knowledge for new innovations or improvements of the initial product (Hang Do, Mazzarol, Volery, & Reboud 2012, p. 16). Conclusion The intellectual property rights are now developed into a necessity in the need to become a quickly growing and developed commercial era, a foundation upon which innovations are made, creating incentives offered and a consumer authenticity reinforced. Intellectual property rights can now be viewed as a tool for individual and national economic growth as well as a job creation tool for millions of young innovators. An innovator’s exuberance and the consumer confidence are the forces that can build on more innovators around the world. The government should maintain a balance between the innovators freedom to exercise monopoly and the freedom of the others to access the innovation which will henceforth create a centralized system of incentives for more innovators. Bibliography Ahearn, RJ 2012, Rising Economic Powers and U.S. Trade Policy, Congressional Research Service: Report, pp. 1-53, International Security & Counter Terrorism Reference Center, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Asongu, S 2013, Harmonizing IPRs on Software Piracy: Empirics of Trajectories in Africa, Journal Of Business Ethics, 118, 1, pp. 45-60, Education Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Bernstein, G 2010, ‘In the shadow of innovation, Cardozo Law Review, 31, 6, pp. 67-76. Budde-Sung, A 2013, The Invisible Meets the Intangible: Cultures Impact on Intellectual Property Protection, Journal Of Business Ethics, 117, 2, pp. 345-359, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Campbell, N, Huang, K, & Luckraz, S 2012, Does Weak Intellectual Property Rights Protection Deter Investment in R&D?, World Economics, 13, 3, pp. 79-84, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Carlaw, K, Oxley, L, Walker, P, Thorns, D, & Nuth, M 2006, Beyond the hype: intellectual property and the knowledge society/knowledge economy, Journal Of Economic Surveys, 20, 4, pp. 633-690, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Cotropia, CA 2010, The Upside of Intellectual Propertys Downside, UCLA Law Review, 57, p. 921, LexisNexis Academic: Law Reviews, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Encouraging Innovation: An Overview of Performance and Policies 2006, Economic Policy Reforms, pp. 55-80, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014 Ghio, R 2011, Assessing the impact of IPRs on development: A view from the developing world, Journal of International Development, 23, 7, pp. 43-67. Hang Do, T, Mazzarol, T, Volery, T, & Reboud, S 2012, Innovation Commercialisation and Anticipated Return: A Typology of Innovative SMEs, International Council For Small Business. World Conference Proceedings, pp. 1-23, Entrepreneurial Studies Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Mets, T, Leego, M, Talpsep, T, & Varblane, U 2007, The Role of Intellectual Property Protection in the Business Strategy of University Spin-Off Biotech Companies in a Small Transition Economy, Review Of Central & East European Law, 32, 1, pp. 19-40, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Pugh, S 2013, The great bankrupt divide: amending the rights of trademark licensees under the code, Georgia Law Review, 48, p. 297, LexisNexis Academic: Law Reviews, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Puric, S, Puric, J, & Vlaskovic, K 2013, Competition, antitrust and intellectual property law, Actual Problems Of Economics / Aktualni Problemi Ekonomìki, 148, 10, pp. 430-437, Central & Eastern European Academic Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Radenković-Jocić, D, & Mladenović, I 2012, Protection of intellectual property rights in the context of serbian economic development, Economic Themes, 50, 3, pp. 345-359, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Sichelman, T 2010, Commercializing Patents, Stanford Law Review, 62, p. 341, LexisNexis Academic: Law Reviews, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Read More