Copyright Laws Essay Essay Writing Service Usa
The key moral insight in Locke’s is that all property arises from the fact that individuals must produce the values required for a flourishing human life.
Accordingly, property rights define the sphere of liberty required for an individual to create, use, and dispose of these values.
As I have explained in my scholarship, for instance, patents were defined as civil rights securing fundamental property rights, and thus identified at the time by the legal term of art, “privilege” (see here).
American legislators and courts thus secured property rights in novel and useful inventions, creative works, trademarks, and trade secrets—securing the right to make, use, and profit from the value created by one’s productive (inventive) labors.
As I have explained, this is the essence of Locke’s “mixing labor” argument for property in the that creates the physical goods required for a flourishing human life. depends only on their usefulness to the Life of Man.” (II.26, II.34, II.37, II.36, II.48).
Philosopher Stephen Buckle, for instance, writes that, for Locke, “labour is the improving, value-adding activity required by the duty to preserve oneself and others.” Locke is absolutely clear about the meaning of value: “the intrinsick value of things . This is unsurprising given Locke’s commitment to classical natural law ethical theory and its moral ideal of a flourishing life, consisting of both mental and physical values. This important point is often missed by legal scholars and philosophers who read only the I.30) A flourishing human life requires both intellectual and physical labor—the production of the intellectual and physical values that serve the “conveniences of life” through the uniquely human capacity for rationally guided action.
These and many other type of goods are the byproduct of an individual’s value-creating, productive labor that creates them, acquires them, transforms and uses them, and ultimately disposes of them in voluntary transactions with other people in civil society.
Here, it is sufficient to explain that Lockean theory was determinative in designing IP law, and in fact it drove the creation and application of many doctrines that have come to be settled IP law in the United States, at least with respect to legally securing patented innovation.
To understand this point, though, one must first understand how legal doctrines are generally construed and applied by courts and other legal actors.
Thus, this indeterminacy critique is really a strawman attack on Lockean theory.
Such deeper philosophical concerns, including a deeper conceptual dispute about what comprises the concept of property itself, are beyond the scope of this essay.