Toward a Nonzero-sum Approach to Resolving Global Intellectual Property Disputes: What We Can Learn from Mediators, Business Strategists, and International Relations Theorists

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 Q4 LAW University of Cincinnati Law Review Pub Date : 2002-05-09 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.309859
Peter K. Yu
{"title":"Toward a Nonzero-sum Approach to Resolving Global Intellectual Property Disputes: What We Can Learn from Mediators, Business Strategists, and International Relations Theorists","authors":"Peter K. Yu","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.309859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Countries differ in terms of their levels of wealth, economic structures, technological capabilities, political systems, and cultural tradition. No two countries have the same needs or goals. As a result, policymakers face different political pressures and make different value judgments as to what would best promote the creation and dissemination of intellectual works in their own countries. These uncoordinated judgments eventually result in a conflicting set of intellectual property laws around the world. As countries become increasingly interdependent in this globalized economy, these conflicting laws create tension and sometimes result in disputes. To minimize differences and prevent conflicts, countries use a variety of dispute resolution techniques, including self-help, coercion, mutual exchange of information, international agreements, and multilateral regimes. Commentators generally analyze these techniques by focusing on the number of parties involved in resolving an intellectual property dispute. Using a unilateral-bilateral-multilateral trichotomy, commentators suggest that one can infer some general characteristics of a dispute resolution arrangement by counting the number of parties involved in resolving a conflict. This Article argues that, although the unilateral-bilateral-multilateral trichotomy provides some helpful insights into the nature of a dispute resolution arrangement, it provides very limited information about the effectiveness and future prospects of that arrangement. Thus, the Article proposes a new, but companion, analytical framework, which focuses on the approach used to resolve the conflict, instead of the number of parties involved. Drawing on the experiences of mediators, business strategists, and international relations theorists, this Article argues that the nonzero-sum approach is the most preferable approach used to resolve global intellectual property disputes.","PeriodicalId":45537,"journal":{"name":"University of Cincinnati Law Review","volume":"70 1","pages":"569-650"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2002-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Cincinnati Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.309859","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

Countries differ in terms of their levels of wealth, economic structures, technological capabilities, political systems, and cultural tradition. No two countries have the same needs or goals. As a result, policymakers face different political pressures and make different value judgments as to what would best promote the creation and dissemination of intellectual works in their own countries. These uncoordinated judgments eventually result in a conflicting set of intellectual property laws around the world. As countries become increasingly interdependent in this globalized economy, these conflicting laws create tension and sometimes result in disputes. To minimize differences and prevent conflicts, countries use a variety of dispute resolution techniques, including self-help, coercion, mutual exchange of information, international agreements, and multilateral regimes. Commentators generally analyze these techniques by focusing on the number of parties involved in resolving an intellectual property dispute. Using a unilateral-bilateral-multilateral trichotomy, commentators suggest that one can infer some general characteristics of a dispute resolution arrangement by counting the number of parties involved in resolving a conflict. This Article argues that, although the unilateral-bilateral-multilateral trichotomy provides some helpful insights into the nature of a dispute resolution arrangement, it provides very limited information about the effectiveness and future prospects of that arrangement. Thus, the Article proposes a new, but companion, analytical framework, which focuses on the approach used to resolve the conflict, instead of the number of parties involved. Drawing on the experiences of mediators, business strategists, and international relations theorists, this Article argues that the nonzero-sum approach is the most preferable approach used to resolve global intellectual property disputes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
走向解决全球知识产权纠纷的非零和方法:我们可以从调解人、商业战略家和国际关系理论家那里学到什么
各国的财富水平、经济结构、技术能力、政治制度和文化传统各不相同。没有两个国家有相同的需求或目标。因此,政策制定者面临不同的政治压力,并对在本国促进智力作品创作和传播的最佳方式做出不同的价值判断。这些不协调的判决最终导致世界各地的知识产权法律相互冲突。随着各国在全球化经济中日益相互依存,这些相互冲突的法律造成了紧张局势,有时还导致争端。为了尽量减少分歧和防止冲突,各国使用各种争端解决技术,包括自助、强制、相互交换信息、国际协议和多边机制。评论员一般通过关注解决知识产权纠纷的当事方数量来分析这些技巧。使用单边-双边-多边三分法,评论者建议人们可以通过计算参与解决冲突的各方的数量来推断争端解决安排的一些一般特征。本文认为,尽管单边-双边-多边三分法对争端解决安排的性质提供了一些有益的见解,但它提供的有关该安排的有效性和未来前景的信息非常有限。因此,文章提出了一个新的,但配套的分析框架,该框架侧重于解决冲突的方法,而不是涉及各方的数量。本文借鉴了调解人、商业战略家和国际关系理论家的经验,认为非零和方法是解决全球知识产权争端的最佳方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The University of Cincinnati Law Review is a quarterly publication produced by second and third-year law students. The Review, along with its counterparts at all other accredited law schools, makes a significant contribution to scholarly legal literature. In addition, the Review represents the College of Law to the outside community. Each year, approximately 30 students are invited to join the Law Review as Associate Members. All Associate Members are chosen on the basis of first year grade point average combined with a writing competition score. The competition begins immediately after completion of first year studies.
期刊最新文献
The Need for a Lenient Admissibility Standard for Defense Forensic Evidence Law’s Enterprise: Argumentation Schemes & Legal Analogy State Civil Rights Remedies for Gender Violence: a Tool for Accountability Political Discrimination by Private Employers Benefit Corporation Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1