The scale is the most famous emblem of the law, including intellectual property (IP). Because IP rights impose social costs on the public by limiting access to protected work, the law can be justified only to the extent that, on balance, it encourages enough creation and dissemination of new works to offset those costs. The scale is thus a potent rhetorical trope of fairness and objectivity, but also an instrument the law thinks with – one that is constantly invoked to justify or to question the extent of available IP protection. The balancing act that underlies the legitimacy of IP is, however, literally impossible to perform. Because we are unable to measure the benefits that IP has for inventors or the costs it has for the public, the scale has nothing to weigh. It conveys a clear sense that IP law can be balanced, but in fact propagates only a visible simulacrum of balance – one that is as empty as it is powerful.
...More
Article
Mario Biagioli;
Marius Buning;
(2018)
“Technologies of the Law/ Law as a Technology”
(/isis/citation/CBB983863737/)
Book
Con Díaz Gerardo;
(2019)
Software Rights: How Patent Law Transformed Software Development in America
(/isis/citation/CBB992270814/)
Article
Hyo Yoon Kang;
(2018)
Ghosts of Inventions: Patent Law’s Digital Mediations
(/isis/citation/CBB448268694/)
Article
Pottage, Alain;
(October 2011)
Law machines: Scale models, forensic materiality and the making of modern patent law
(/isis/citation/CBB306887041/)
Chapter
Samuelson, Pamela;
(2011)
The Strange Odyssey of Software Interfaces as Intellectual Property
(/isis/citation/CBB001221563/)
Book
Matsuura, Jeffrey H.;
(2008)
Jefferson vs. the Patent Trolls: A Populist Vision of Intellectual Property Rights
(/isis/citation/CBB000954251/)
Article
Ratcliff, Jessica;
(2012)
Art to Cheat the Common-Weale: Inventors, Projectors, and Patentees in English Satire, ca. 1630--70
(/isis/citation/CBB001250063/)
Article
Yi, Doogab;
(2011)
Who Owns What? Private Ownership and the Public Interest in Recombinant DNA Technology in the 1970s
(/isis/citation/CBB001220006/)
Article
Brad Sherman;
(2018)
Intangible Machines: Patent Protection for Software in the United States
(/isis/citation/CBB843796158/)
Article
Stathis Arapostathis;
(2018)
Marconi’s Legal Battles: Discursive, Textual, and Material Entanglements
(/isis/citation/CBB218081238/)
Article
Jérôme Baudry;
(2018)
Examining Inventions, Shaping Property: The Savants and the French Patent System
(/isis/citation/CBB294489583/)
Article
Franck Cochoy;
(November 2021)
Patents as Vehicles of Social and Moral Concerns: The Case of Johnson & Johnson Disposable Feminine Hygiene Products (1925–2012)
(/isis/citation/CBB399280188/)
Article
Kat Jungnickel;
(2023)
Speculative sewing: Researching, reconstructing, and re-imagining wearable technoscience
(/isis/citation/CBB772079838/)
Book
Biagioli, Mario;
Jaszi, Peter;
Woodmansee, Martha;
(2011)
Making and Unmaking Intellectual Property: Creative Production in Legal and Cultural Perspective
(/isis/citation/CBB001221432/)
Article
Balkin, Jack M.;
(2008)
The future of free expression in a digital age
(/isis/citation/CBB001180049/)
Book
Nowotny, Helga;
(2005)
The Public Nature of Science under Assault: Politics, Markets, Science and the Law
(/isis/citation/CBB000831366/)
Article
Ross, Andrew;
(2006)
Technology and Below-the-Line Labor in the Copyfight over Intellectual Property
(/isis/citation/CBB001030913/)
Article
Scranton, Philip;
(2012)
Thinking about Work, Knowledge, Law and Property
(/isis/citation/CBB001210230/)
Article
Coleman, Gabriella;
(2009)
Code is speech: Legal tinkering, expertise and protest among free and open software developers
(/isis/citation/CBB001180057/)
Article
Douglas O'Reagan;
(January 2017)
Know-How in Postwar Business and Law
(/isis/citation/CBB448969352/)
Be the first to comment!