The definition of Intellectual Property - Essay Example

Examples include licensing arrangements under which the licensee pays the licensor to exploit the right; the imposition of contractual obligations not to use or disclose information; or restrictive covenants which prohibit employees from establishing rival businesses within a specified period or geographical area. A more laconic definition of intellectual property suggests that 'it comprises all those things which emanate from the exercise of the human brain, such as ideas, inventions, poems, designs, micro computers and Mickey Mouse' (Phillips 2001, p.3). Intellectual property rights refer to the ability to own and protect the products of human intellect.

These rights may have to be applied for and granted, or in some cases, such as with copyright, this arises automatically. Formally, there are four main types of intellectual property protection and these will be explained briefly below. Patents cover inventions of both new and improved products and processes. They are probably the most publicised and conventional form of protection. Patents are granted to cover new products and processes and in the United Kingdom last for up to 20 years. . Patenting systems vary throughout the world and their jurisdiction is territorial.

In the United Kingdom the patent is granted to the first applicant to file rather than to invent.The Intellectual Property Scenario in EuropeThe European Patent Organisation and the European Commission have been concerned that the above statistics imply that the innovative potential within Europe is not being adequately tapped. Patent offices across Europe frequently argue that the patent system is not being adequately used, leaving considerable numbers of potential innovations unprotected (Hofinger 1996, p.91-98). There is a different culture concerning patenting in Japan, where it is common to file a number of applications for a single invention.

It may be argued that the difference in approaches to the use of the formal intellectual property systems, identified between nation states, is also one of the distinguishing features between small and large firms. Similarly, the relatively low use of the formal systems by small firms may also mean that a reliance on patent counts, etc. is an inaccurate measurement of innovation or research activity. Hence, there is a need to 'unpack' the approaches to innovation and intellectual property management by owner-managers.

However, the perceived positive link between formal intellectual property protection and innovation is not without controversy. (Granstrand 1999, p. 13-16) Empirical and theoretical research has offered several arguments in favour of weaker intellectual property protection. One argument hinges on the negative effects of monopolistic behaviour that strong protection permits. Gilbert and Newbery (1982,