This post is a continuation of Posts below -
What is Intellectual Property Rights(IP Rights)-Part 1?
What is Intellectual Property Rights(IP Rights)-Part 2?
Intellectual Property is a legal definition not a natural right or scientifically provable objective fact
I did not plan initially to create Part 3 of this blog. But some discussions in social media regarding Intellectual Property forced me to further clarify the topic. In reality Intellectual Property is a legal definition rather than some scientific objective definition or a natural right like . So ambiguity is a builtin feature. Couple this with the complexity and cost involved in due legal processes. So there is no sense in being emotionally charged about your intellectual output. Emotional vulnerability can be costly in terms of money as well as time. Knowing when to quit can be really life saving.
What happens when you work in high tech industry?
Hi tech or research companies buy intellectual property generated by their employees using company equipment or time or resources, by means of employment agreement. This means you have to sign an agreement to give ownership of all intellectual property generated using company resources inside their facility in exchange for salary and career opportunities. This includes all the digital(non material) or non digital(material) artifacts generated as part of working inside their campus. This can be as simple as a notepad you used for some company training.
Then who is right(legally)?
So when there is a dispute between two parties(legal) then what we have to really analyze, does any form of agreement exists between the two parties. Is the agreement valid at the time of dispute? Even copyright protection or patent is not a one time fees and lifetime protection system. The owner of intellectual property can either sell the intellectual property itself or allow copyright licensing if he has valid(not expired) copyright protection for his Intellectual Property. If there is no Copyright protection of the IP then anybody can legally copy it without even the owners permission, but nobody can take away the original as it would be considered as stealing. But in digital context everything is a copy.
Making money out of peoples intellectual output
For governments around the world this has become a new revenue stream. So before you decide to put some intellectual output of yours for copyright protection you need to do a cost benefit analysis. In simple terms if you are a nature photographer it is not cost effective to copyright every image that you click. Unless you are sure that some rare photo is going to generate huge revenue it is better not to waste money. I have seen people fighting over images or videos who's copyright protection is expired. This is plain mudslinging and will not stand the rigorous legal process.
When to go for legal process?
Go for legal process only if you have strong gut feeling that this can lead to huge profit. Legal process is costly not just in terms of money but also in terms of time. When you go for fight to court with another party for any Intellectual Property related claims you have to be clear with the terms. The difference between copyright and intellectual property itself. Whether you have a valid copyright protection(else it is a time waste and money waste to go to courts over someone copying your IP). Only taking away the original is IP theft. If you sold your IP to someone for money or employment, then you lose all future claims to the intellectual property and copyright of it. It may have come from your intellectual faculty but since you sold it you are no longer legal owner.
So understanding the subtle differences in how a court perceives the subject matter rather than our own emotional attachment to the intellectual property will make it easier for us to decide our next course of action in case of a intellectual property ownership dispute with someone else. This is the only cost effective and realistic way to navigate the complex legal frameworks in place regarding Intellectual property. If someone decides to go all out to challenge someone in court without considering the financial aspects of the same, it will be a personal choice.
Who actually dictated the laws?
Companies around the world are masters in this field of ambiguity and can play a really skewed off game of legal battle when there is a dispute with an individual. Since the common voters were sleeping peacefully when intellectual property laws where being framed, our beloved leaders invited the big companies over to dictate the terms of the laws. They gave "convenient" definition to intellectual property while common voters where sleeping peacefully.
So by spending more time in understanding the ambiguity of laws and how companies make use of it to their advantage, understanding the difference between intellectual property and copy of intellectual property, whether the intellectual property has valid copyright protection, whether you have sold the intellectual property to someone in exchange for some other favor or opportunity which is clearly enunciated in a legal document, understanding the legal rights of platform provider etc are to be reflected before going on all out battles in courts that too with big corporations.
Big companies are legally not in copyright violation
It can be safely told that most Big tech companies are not in violation of intellectual property theft or copyright violation as they have strict policies aimed towards such matters. They are really careful in the same as they have better understanding of the same. If someone feels a big tech company really did copyright violation or intellectual property theft then you need to consult some expert to analyze if this is a misunderstanding from your side. Else you will end up paying for the costly legal battle which big corporations can afford but you can barely afford and then in the end you will lose the case in court.
It is really better to be realistic than emotional. You have to realize talent can never be taken away by anyone but the monetization of the talent output may or may not have legal stake holders depending on how you created this output. So it is better to be more legally clear next time you create a intellectual property with or without someone else's help.
You can check out more articles in the archives below -
Tchao Friends
Please share your valuable comments.
