ITMOC

This essay discusses intellectual property rights (IPRs) from sociological perspective by referring Napster as the main case study. It examines IPRs by examining its history, theoretical foundations, and current practices. Labor theory and personality theory of intellectual property are not sufficient to justify the importance and existence of IPRs since they pose some problems in the real practices. Such problems especially are concerned with the difficulty to control and measure IPRs. Besides, IPRs is also impossible to be implemented due to the role of technology, which often developed to liberate people to get, use, and disseminate information and knowledge easily and with lower costs. At this point IPRs is against the basic rights of people, because it privatizes and commodifies information which should be available as a public good.

This essay argues that IPRs is an ill concept and, thus, can not be defended. It results in negative impacts on our society. The rhetoric often used the proponents of IPRs, such as creativity and competition, is falsified by showing some evidence that IPRs is not fostering creativity and, in the long-term, really harmful to business competition. To a great extent IPRs also make the society suffer because companies holding rights or monopolize their intellectual work usually set prices for their products high, and can only be afforded by the well-offs. This essay also elaborates real political economy setting at which IPRs forced, largely by the U.S., as a single economic agenda in this information age. This reflects that IPRs is a regime of truth because it is based on a particular discourse set by the U.S.

Selengkapnya – more (pdf)…..