[-] Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorVallentyne, Petereng
dc.contributor.authorTrerise, Jonathan, 1977-eng
dc.date.issued2007eng
dc.date.submitted2007 Summereng
dc.descriptionThe entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file.eng
dc.descriptionTitle from title screen of research.pdf file (viewed on December 14, 2007)eng
dc.descriptionVita.eng
dc.descriptionThesis (Ph. D.) University of Missouri-Columbia 2007.eng
dc.description.abstractI argue that weak type-protection is the form our legal intellectual property rights should take. Other intellectual property regimes - specifically, strong type-protection (like that of our current American patent system) and no intellectual property protection - are both unjustified. I argue for weak type-protection (and against the other two regimes) from the perspective of many different ethical theories; these theories span the gamut from those which philosophers tend to find plausible to those which are usually used in the literature in the context of the justification of intellectual property rights. Weak type-protection allows a claim over a class of objects; according to this view, one can come to own an original specific token, as well as have a claim on some uses of copies of that original token - that is, owners have some protection over copies of their ideas (unlike under a regime of no intellectual property). Importantly, unlike strong typeprotection, weak type-protection requires that all owned tokens be causally related to an original owned token; this allows for independent invention amongst two or more individuals (something that strong type-protection denies). Since weak type-protection is justified on both consequentialist and deontological theories, and since, again, the theories I address are both independently plausible and relevant in the context of the justification of intellectual property rights, there is a strong presumption that, on any plausible theory, weak type-protection is the form our legal intellectual property rights should take.eng
dc.description.bibrefIncludes bibliographical references.eng
dc.identifier.merlinb61522703eng
dc.identifier.oclc183886187eng
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.32469/10355/4788eng
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10355/4788
dc.languageEnglisheng
dc.publisherUniversity of Missouri--Columbiaeng
dc.relation.ispartofcommunityUniversity of Missouri--Columbia. Graduate School. Theses and Dissertationseng
dc.rightsOpenAccess.eng
dc.rights.licenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License.
dc.subject.lcshIntellectual propertyeng
dc.subject.lcshCopyrighteng
dc.subject.lcshIntangible propertyeng
dc.subject.lcshPatent laws and legislationeng
dc.titleA justified system of intellectual property rightseng
dc.typeThesiseng
thesis.degree.disciplinePhilosophy (MU)eng
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Missouri--Columbiaeng
thesis.degree.levelDoctoraleng
thesis.degree.namePh. D.eng


Files in this item

[PDF]
[PDF]
[PDF]

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

[-] Show simple item record