Intellectual property rights are typically justified by four philosophical theories. The first is the labor theory of John Locke. According to John Locke, a property right is a natural right that arises from the work put in. Intellectual property rights are therefore justified by the fact that the creator invests work in his intellectual creation. The problem with this justification of intellectual property rights is that no work is invested in some intellectual creations. The second is Hegel's personality theory according to which, individuals have property claims to the external manifestations of their personality. Intellectual creations are supposed to be an extension of an individual's personality and therefore individuals have a property claim to those creations. The problem is that it is difficult to justify intellectual property rights on intellectual creations that lack the creator’s personality. The third philosophical theory with which intellectual property is typically justified is the utilitarian theory. According to this theory, intellectual property is necessary to maximize social benefits, as it is supposed to act as an incentive to create and thus contribute to the advancement of science and art. But it often happens that intellectual property rights have the opposite effect. The last theory is the social planning theory, which justifies intellectual property with the fact that it is supposed to play an important role in establishing an attractive and just society. Karl Marx, who created the grounds for social planning theory, had the opposite view of intellectual property, believing that intellectual property was a construct of the ruling class with which it controlled the working class. The analysis of the philosophical bases of intellectual property shows that it is necessary to think about the alternative possibilities available for the promotion and rewarding of intellectual work.
|
