$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$
  • 검색어에 아래의 연산자를 사용하시면 더 정확한 검색결과를 얻을 수 있습니다.
  • 검색연산자
검색연산자 기능 검색시 예
() 우선순위가 가장 높은 연산자 예1) (나노 (기계 | machine))
공백 두 개의 검색어(식)을 모두 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (나노 기계)
예2) 나노 장영실
| 두 개의 검색어(식) 중 하나 이상 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (줄기세포 | 면역)
예2) 줄기세포 | 장영실
! NOT 이후에 있는 검색어가 포함된 문서는 제외 예1) (황금 !백금)
예2) !image
* 검색어의 *란에 0개 이상의 임의의 문자가 포함된 문서 검색 예) semi*
"" 따옴표 내의 구문과 완전히 일치하는 문서만 검색 예) "Transform and Quantization"
쳇봇 이모티콘
안녕하세요!
ScienceON 챗봇입니다.
궁금한 것은 저에게 물어봐주세요.

논문 상세정보

지식재산권의 해석 도구로서 재산권(Property)과 자연독점(Natural Monopoly) - 미국에서의 법경제학적 논의를 중심으로

An Analysis of Intellectual Property as Property and Natural Monopoly: Focusing on the Law and Economics Approaches in the U.S.

재산법연구 v.29 no.4 , 2013년, pp.161 - 185  
진도왕
초록

Intellectual property rights have been developed through using the metaphor of property. This tradition of using the property metaphor has long been dominant in the field of intellectual property. Intellectual property has been recognized as a sort of property that is a right over intellectual products. When understanding intellectual property in terms of property, it is likely to reduce intellectual property to an exclusive right. An emphasis on the exclusive right alone leads to expansions of intellectual property rights through understanding intellectual property infringement in terms of the language of trespass, granting strong injunctive remedies, or extending the duration of copyrights. This paper explores whether the property metaphor properly serves as an interpretative device to understand intellectual property rights. More specifically, it focuses on whether understanding intellectual property as property covers all aspects of intellectual property. Then, it demonstrates that the metaphor of natural monopoly can be an alternative interpretive device to the property. Intellectual property as property gives rise to controversies about the scope of intellectual property rights. Understanding intellectual property as property does not provide any implication for defining the extent to which intellectual property rights should or could be protected. Rather, it may justify the maximization of exclusivity so that it ends up with the excessive protection of intellectual property rights. The excessive protection through too strong exclusivity is likely to impede enjoying innovation by blocking distribution of intellectual property in the market. At this stage, natural monopoly can be considered as an alternative interpretive device to property in the field of intellectual property. As demonstrated in the text, recasting intellectual property as natural monopoly does not so much weaken the property nature of intellectual property, but it also explains more precisely all aspects of the intellectual property, which include production, distribution and commercialization of intellectual property in the market. By doing so, it makes it possible to harmonize intellectual property with public interests, moving away from private interests. Furthermore, it provides an implication for defining the proper scope of intellectual property rights. Consequently, this movement accords with pursuing innovation as the final goal of intellectual property laws.

참고문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문의 참고문헌 없음

이 논문을 인용한 문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문을 인용한 문헌 없음

원문보기

원문 PDF 다운로드

  • KCI :

원문 URL 링크

  • 원문 URL 링크 정보가 존재하지 않습니다.
상세조회 0건 원문조회 0건

DOI 인용 스타일