1 / 18

Examining Public Disengagement Mechanisms in the Patent System

Analyzing the contrast between public engagement and disengagement mechanisms in the context of patent policies. Investigating how citizens are constituted with limited voice and action capacities. Exploring the impact of patents on democratic representation and innovation. Discussing the role of intellectual property rights in shaping societal structures and citizenship.

yitro
Download Presentation

Examining Public Disengagement Mechanisms in the Patent System

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Patents as Public Disengagement Stephen Hilgartner Cornell University Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  2. Public Engagement Mechanisms • as devices for giving voice or opening channels for (pre-existing) citizens, publics to speak and act • As devices that constitute citizens with enhanced capacities of speech and action • Lots of work: • Public engagement exercises • Journal articles on how to do them • Journal articles questioning what they accomplish • Alan Irwin’s (xxxx) critique won a best article prize from the Society for Social Studies of Science • 25K Google hits on “public engagement mechanisms” Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  3. Little work on Public Disengagement Mechanisms • Not a category: 2 Google hits • Research on public disengagement mechanisms would: • Not naturalize citizen, public disengagement • Examine how citizens, publics with limited voice and capacity for action are constituted • Integrate study of PEM and PDM Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  4. Patent System as a Public Disengagement Mechanism • Contrast two policy discourses • Innovation discourse • Politics-of-technology discourse • A policy discourse: • an organized assemblage of concepts, categories, frames, metaphors, and narratives that gives definition and structure to a domain of policy making Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  5. Innovation Discourse • Discursive starting point: • A narrative that frames innovation as a social good, inventor as hero, free rider as villain, limited property rights as solution, society as beneficiary Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  6. Innovation Discourse • Central questions: • What constitutes a patentable invention? What counts as infringement? How should novelty be codified? What way of structuring IP rights will maximize innovation? Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  7. Innovation Discourse metric of success = stimulating innovation Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  8. Politics of Technology Discourse • Discursive starting point: • Given the awesome power of modern technologies, decisions about emerging technologies are decisions about the future shape of societies. This situation poses deep problems for democratic states. Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  9. Politics of Technology Discourse • Central questions: • Do patents at times limit the ability of publics to exercise voice and choice in these negotiations? • More deeply, what forms of citizenship do various intellectual property regimes constitute? What kinds of democratic representation do they tend to support? Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  10. Comparing the Perspectives • Visions of technological change Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  11. Comparing the Perspectives • Visions of technological change • Market power or configuration power Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  12. Comparing the Perspectives • Visions of technological change • Market power or configuration power • Transparent or opaque Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  13. Comparing the Perspectives • Visions of technological change • Market power or configuration power • Transparent or opaque • The inventor or the citizen Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  14. Comparing the Perspectives • Visions of technological change • Market power or configuration power • Transparent or opaque • The inventor or the citizen • Efficient innovation or adequate representation Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  15. Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

  16. Lessons • For Intellectual Property debate • Independent argument for IP minimalism • Argument for open source innovation • For Public Engagement • Importance of attending not just to new add-on mechanisms of engaging but also to institutional structures that constitute publics as disengaged Foro-Taller ASCTI, October 2010

More Related