Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Wissen als geistiges Privateigentum?

Die Einfriedung der Public Domain

Knowledge as intellectual private property?

  • Aufsätze
  • Published:
Leviathan

Abstract

Whereas the notion of “knowledge society” has gained common currency when it comes to describe modern society, social scientists in Germany have long neglected the far reaching changes in the regulation of intellectual property rights which have taken place in the last decade. What can be observed is a global trend toward a stronger protection of intellectual property rights or, as some authors say, an enclosure of the knowledge commons. That development is likely to have far reaching consequences not only for international trade relations but also for knowledge production and social communication. This survey attempts to trace the changes in the political economy of intellectual property rights and examines probable effects of the global enclosure of knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CAFC:

US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

DMCA:

Digital Millennium Copyright Act

DRM:

Digital Rights Management

FuE:

Forschung und Entwicklung

GATT:

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

IIPA:

International Intellectual Property Alliance

IPRs:

Intellectual Property Rights

NGOs:

Non-Governmental Organizations

OECD:

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

TRIPs:

Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights

WCT:

WIPO Copyright Treaty

WIPO:

World Intellectual Property Organization

WPPT:

WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty

WTO:

World Trade Organization

Literatur

  • Abbott, F.M., 1998: The enduring enigma of TRIPS: A challenge for the world economic system, in: Journal of International Economic Law 1, S. 497–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abbott, F.M., 2005: Toward a new era of objective assessment in the field of TRIPs and variable geometry for the preservation of multilateralism, in: Journal of International Economic Law 8, S. 77–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aoki, K., 1996: (Intellectual) property and sovereignty: Notes toward a cultural geography of authorship, in: Stanford Law Review 48, S. 1293–1355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollier, D., 2002: Silent theft: The private plunder of our common wealth, New York/London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, J., 1997: Shamans, software, and spleens: Law and the construction of the information society, Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, J., 2002: Fencing off ideas: Enclosure and the disappearance of the public domain, in: Daedalus, S. 13–25.

  • Boyle, J., 2003: The second enclosure movement and the construction of the public domain, in: Law and Contemporary Problems 66, S. 33–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. und P. Drahos, 2000: Global business regulation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J.M. und Y.J. Yoon, 2000: Symmetric tragedies: Commons and anticommons, in: Journal of Law and Economics 53, S. 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Correa, C.M., 2000: Intellectual property rights, the WTO and developing countries: The TRIPS agreement and policy options, London/New York: TWN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, P. und P.A. David, 1994: Toward a new economics of science, in: Research Policy 23, S. 487–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David, P.A., 2003: The economic logic of „open science“ and the balance between property rights and the public domain in scientific data and information: A primer, in: J.M. Esanu und P.F. Uhlir (Hrsg.), The role of scientific and technical data and information, Washington, DC: National Academic Press, S. 19–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • David, P.A., 2004: Can „open science“ be protected from the evolving regime of IPR protections?, in: Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 160, S. 9–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David, P.A. und D. Foray, 2003: Economic fundamentals of the knowledge society, in: Policy Futures in Education 1, S. 20–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drahos, P. und J. Braithwaite, 2002: Information feudalism: Who owns the knowledge economy?, London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drahos, P. und R. Mayne, 2002: Global intellectual property rights: Knowledge, access and development, Houndmills/New York: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P.F., 1993: Post-capitalist society, New York, NY: HarperBusiness.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elangi Botoy, I., 2004: From the Paris Convention to the TRIPS: A one-hundred-and-twelve-year transitional period for the industrialized countries, in: Journal of World Intellectual Property 7, S. 115–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, R.A., 2003: Steady the course: Property rights in genetic material, in: John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper 152.

  • Fink, C. und K.E. Maskus, 2005: Intellectual property and development: Lessons from recent economic research, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallini, N.T., 2002: The economics of patents: Lessons from recent U.S. patent reform, in: Journal of Economic Perspectives 16, S. 131–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gervais, D., 2003: The TRIPS agreement: Drafting history and analysis, 2nd. edn., London: Sweet & Maxwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, T., 2004: Copyright and commerce: The DMCA, trusted systems, and the stabilization of distribution, in: Information Society 20, S. 239–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grassmuck, V., 2002: Freie Software: Zwischen Privat- und Gemeineigentum, Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadfield, G.K., 1992: The economics of copyright: An historical perspective, in: Copyright Law Symposium 38, S. 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, G., 1968: The tragedy of the commons, in: Science 162, S. 1243–1248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidenreich, M., 2003: Die Debatte um die Wissenschaft, in: S. Böschen und I. Schulz-Schaeffer (Hrsg.), Wissenschaft in der Wissensgesellschaft, Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, 2002a: Die Zukunft der globalen Güter in der Wissensgesellschaft: Auf der Suche nach einer nachhaltigen Politik zum Schutz des geistigen Eigentums, Berlin: Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, 2002b: Digitales Urheberrecht: Zwischen „Information Sharing“ und „Information“ — Spielräume für das öffentliche Interesse am Wissen?, Berlin: Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heller, M.A. und R.S. Eisenberg, 1998: Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research, in: Science 280, S. 698–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, C., 2002: TRIPS, Patentschutz für Medikamente und staatliche Gesundheitspolitik: Hinreichende Flexibilität?, in: Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 13, S. 37–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess, C. und E. Ostrom, 2003: Ideas, artifacts, and facilities: Information as a common-pool resource, in: Law and Contemporary Problems 66, S. 111–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoekman, B. und M. Kostecki, 1995: The political economy of the world trading system: From GATT to WTO, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, J., 2001: Digitale Unterwanderungen: Der Wandel im Innern des Wissens, in: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, S. 3–6.

  • Hofmann, J., 2004: Das neue Urheberrecht: Schranke der Wissensgesellschaft im digitalen Zeitalter, in: Arbeitspapier der Hans Böckler-Stiftung 85.

  • Jaffe, A.B., 2000: The U.S. patent system in transition: Policy innovation and the innovation process, in: Research Policy 29, S. 531–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhlen, R., 2002: Bausteine zur Entwicklung einer Wissensökologie: Plädoyer für eine nachhaltige Sicht auf den UN-Weltgipfel zur Informationsgesellschaft (WSIS), in: Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung (Hrsg.), Die Zukunft der globalen Güter in der Wissensgesellschaft: Auf der Suche nach einer nachhaltigen Politik zum Schutz des geistigen Eigentums, Berlin: Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, S. 66–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhlen, R., 2004: Informationsethik: Umgang mit Wissen und Information in elektronischen Räumen, Münster: UVK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landes, W.M. und R.A. Posner, 2003: The economic structure of intellectual property law, Cambridge/London: Belknap.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanoszka, A., 2003: The global politics of intellectual property rights and pharmaceutical drug: Politicies in developing countries, in: International Political Science Review 24, S. 181–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lessig, L., 2001a: Code und andere Gesetze des Cyberspace, Berlin: Berlin Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lessig, L., 2001b: The future of ideas: The fate of the commons in a connected world, New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lessig, L., 2004: Free culture: The nature and future of creativity, New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litman, J., 1991: Copyright as Myth, in: University of Pittsburgh Law Review 53, S. 235–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litman, J., 2001: Digital copyright, New York: Prometheus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maskus, K.E., 1998: The international regulation of intellectual property, in: Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 134, S. 187–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maskus, K.E. und J.H. Reichman, 2004: The globalization of private knowledge goods and privatization of global public goods, in: Journal of International Economic Law 7, S. 279–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maskus, K.E. und G.F. Yang, 2000: Intellectual property rights, foreign direct investment and competition issues in developing countries, in: International Journal of Technology Management 19, S. 22–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maskus, K.E. (Hrsg.), 2004: The WTO, intellectual property rights and the knowledge economy, Cheltenham: Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, D., 2002: Globalizing intellectual property rights: The TRIPs agreement, London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, C., 2000: A global political economy of intellectual property rights: The new enclosures?, London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzoleni, R. und R.R. Nelson, 1998: The benefits and costs of strong patent protection: A contribution to the current debate, in: Research Policy 27, S. 273–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCourt, T. und P. Burkart, 2003: When creators, corporations, and consumers collide: Napster and the development of on-line music distribution, in: Media Culture & Society 25, S. 333–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menell, P.S., 2000: Intellectual property: General theories, in: B. Bouckaert und G. DeGeest (Hrsg.), Encyclopedia of law and economics, Cheltenham et al.: Elgar, S. 129–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merges, R.P., 1994: Intellectual property rights and bargaining breakdown: The case of blocking patents, in: Tennessee Law Review 62, S. 74–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noll, R.G., 2004: The conflict over vertical foreclosure in competition policy and intellectual property law, in: Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 160, S. 79–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E., 1990: Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action, New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perez Pugatch, M., 2004: The international political economy of intellectual property rights, Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, K., 2004: The great transformation: Politische und ökonomische Ursprünge von Gesellschaften und Wirtschaftssystemen, Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preusse, H.G., 1996: Die Welthandelsorganisation (WTO) und die geistigen Eigentumsrechte, In: Außenwirtschaft 51, S. 27–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rehbinder, M., 1995: Das Urheberrecht im TRIPS-Abkommen: Entwicklungschub durch die New Economic World Order. UFITA: Archiv für Urheber- und Medienrecht, S. 5–34.

  • Romer, P., 2002: When should we use intellectual property rights?, in: American Economic Review Paper and Proceedings 92, S. 213–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, M.P., 1998: Knowledge diplomacy: Global competition and the politics of intellectual property, Washington, D.C.: Brookings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P., 1997: The U.S. digital agenda at the World Intellectual Property Organization. Virginia Journal of International Law 37, S. 369–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P., 2001: Anticircumvention rules: Threat to science, in: Science 293, S. 2028–2031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P., 2003: Mapping the digital public domain: Threats and opportunities, in: Law and Contemporary Problems 66, S. 146–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, B. und L. Bently, 1999: The making of modern intellectual property law: The English experience, 1760–1911, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P., R. Davis, M.D. Kapor und J.H. Reichman, 1994: A manifesto concerning the legal protection of computer-programs, in: Columbia Law Review 94, S. 2308–2431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sell, S.K., 1998: Power and ideas: North-South politics of intellectual property and antitrust, Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sell, S.K., 2003: Private power, public law: the globalization of intellectual property rights, Cambridge, U.K./New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sell, S.K. und C. May, 2001: Moments in law: Contestation and settlement in the history of intellectual property, in: Review of International Political Economy 8, S. 467–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slonina, M., 2003: Durchbruch im Spannungsverhältnis TRIPS and Health: Die WTO-Entscheidung zu Exporten unter Zwangslizenzen, in: Beiträge zum Transnationalen Wirtschaftsrecht 20.

  • Stehr, N., 2003: Wissenspolitik: Die Überwachung des Wissens, Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, P.E., 1996: The economics of science, in: Journal of Economic Literature 34, S. 1199–1235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stremmel, D., 2004: Geistige Eigentumsrechte im Welthandel: Stellt das TRIPS-Abkommen ein Protektionsinstrument der Industrieländer dar? CeGE-Discussion Paper 32.

  • Sun, H., 2004: The road to Doha and beyond: Some reflections on the TRIPS agreement and public health, in: European Journal of International Law 15, S. 123–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullrich, H., 2004: Expansionist intellectual property protection and reductionist competition rules: A TRIPS perspective, in: Journal of International Economic Law 7, S. 401–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiler, J.H.H., 2000: The rule of lawyers and the ethos of diplomats: Reflections on the internal and external legitimacy of WTO dispute settlement. Harvard Jean Monnet Working Paper 9/00.

  • Weissman, R., 1996: A long, strange TRIPS: The pharmaceutical industry drive to harmonize global intellectual property rules, and the remaining WTO legal alternatives available to Third World countries. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law 17, S. 1069–1125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wissen, M., 2003: TRIPs, TRIPs-plus und WTO, in: U. Brand und C. Görg (Hrsg.), Postfordistische Naturverhältnisse: Konflikte um genetische Ressourcen und die Internationalisierung des Staates, Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.

    Google Scholar 

  • ZÜrcher Fausch, N., 2002: Die Problematik der Nutzung von Zwangslizenzen durch Staaten ohne eigene Pharmaindustrie: Zur instrumentellen Umsetzung von Art. 6 der Erklärung zum TRIPs und zum öffentlichen Gesundheitswesen, in: Außenwirtschaft 57, S. 495–522.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Henk Erik Meier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

Meier, H.E. Wissen als geistiges Privateigentum?. Leviathan 33, 492–521 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11578-005-0058-4

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11578-005-0058-4

Search

Navigation