Labour‐Based Justifications of Intellectual Property and the Problem of Disruptive Innovations.

Justifying intellectual property on the basis of labour is an understandably popular strategy, but there is a tension in basing some intellectual property claims on labour that has gone largely unnoticed in treatments of the subject: many forms of innovation cause people to lose their jobs, which se...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of Applied Philosophy Vol. 37; no. 5; pp. 799 - 818
Autor principal: Duncan, Samuel
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Nov2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=147580545&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 147580545
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        02643758
        BQ0
      jtl: Journal of Applied Philosophy
      issn: 02643758
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Nov2020
      vid: 37
      iid: 5
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
    artinfo:
      ui:
        147580545
        10.1111/japp.12449
      ppf: 799
      ppct: 19
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 128KB
      tig:
        atl: Labour‐Based Justifications of Intellectual Property and the Problem of Disruptive Innovations.
      aug:
        au: Duncan, Samuel
        affil: Department of Philosophy, Tidewater Community College, Virginia Beach VA, , USA
      su:
        Intellectual property
        Disruptive innovations
        Unemployment
        Property rights
      sug:
        subj:
          Intellectual property
          Disruptive innovations
          Unemployment
          Property rights
      ab: Justifying intellectual property on the basis of labour is an understandably popular strategy, but there is a tension in basing some intellectual property claims on labour that has gone largely unnoticed in treatments of the subject: many forms of innovation cause people to lose their jobs, which seriously hampers the ability of those who lose work to productively use their own labour. This article shows that even under Lockean and other labour‐based justifications of intellectual property rights those who claim property rights to innovations of this type have special obligations to compensate those who lose work because of their inventions. By examining the problem that such innovations create, I hope to contribute to larger debates about automation and the job losses it often brings. Lockean and other labour‐based theories of intellectual property are generally taken to secure strong, noninstrumental rights to intellectual property if they are successful. So, if even these theories imply that those who profit from the innovations driving automation have special obligations to those left jobless by it, that is strong evidence that they do in fact have such obligations.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Journal of Applied Philosophy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Journal of Applied Philosophy
      holder: Wiley-Blackwell
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2020
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N