Globalization
Today, globalization has reached new levels of importance in the modern world. Not everyone agrees that globalization is necessarily a good thing for the modern world, but whether it is a good or a bad thing, it seems to be unavoidable. Globalization is often spoken about in broad terms, but what globalization truly is is the integration of different cultures and the intermeshing of different economies across geographic, cultural, or other traditional barriers to integration. The term is a relatively new one, used to describe the world in the closing years of the Cold War and the new, more openly-integrated world.
Globalization can be identified using four basic characteristics, according to the International Monetary Fund: trade and/or transactions, capital and investment movements, dissemination or distribution of knowledge, and migration or movement of people. Trade and transactions refer to the type of integrative trading that a country does with other countries; North Korea, for example, has a low rate of globalization according to this metric alone, due to the fact that it does little mutual trade with the outside world, and instead consumes large amounts of aid from other nations. The United States, alternatively, is very integrated into the global markets; its trade and transaction rates are very high, and it is very active insofar as the trade and transaction metric is concerned.
Capital and investment movements are linked to trade and transactions, but they are not necessarily tied inextricably together. Capital and investment movements are risky in emergent economies, as nations with emerging economies have yet to establish true political stability. Capital investments and their related movements in emerging economies may have incredibly high return-- an example of this return can be seen in China’s manufacturing sector, which was once a risky investment-- or it can have disastrous consequences for the investing firm or government. A lack of political stability in nations with emerging economies and risky capital investment opportunities will become an increasingly important part of the discussion regarding the nature of intellectual property and globalization.
The movement and migration of people across borders is another important factor to globalization. When people migrate across borders, they are not absorbed seamlessly into their new homes; they bring culture and beliefs with them, and they often settle in pockets of like-minded people in their new culture. When people migrate, their new home does not remain untouched by the effects of their move either; in fact, culture shifts and changes based largely on the type and number of immigrants moving into and out of an area. Immigration to world cities like New York, London, or Hong Kong has a largely liberalizing effect on those cities, making them more open to change and evolution.
The dissemination of knowledge is, perhaps, the most clearly-related factor when considering intellectual property. However, the ways in which knowledge disseminate in a globalized world are constantly changing; attempting to restrict the dissemination of knowledge in a nation is a monumental task. Personally acquiring knowledge, however, is different from a nation acquiring new technical or mechanical knowledge; intellectual property is deeply concerned with both of these issues. When a company-- whether it is a private or a publicly-owned company-- acquires knowledge that it should not have or has not acquired ethically, the question of this knowledge becomes an issue of intellectual property rights, a major concern for companies operating in the developing world.
All of the defined characteristics of globalization tie heavily into the concept of intellectual property in the globalized world. No matter what the perspective, there is certainly a growing concern over who owns ideas and how to maintain ownership of those ideas without hobbling the world’s advancement as a whole. Lawyers, businesspeople, and politicians must balance the interests of the people-- notably, the interests of those in possession of a marketable idea-- against the interests of the world as a whole and potential worldwide advancement.
Perhaps Thomas Friedman characterizes the new globalized economy best in The World is Flat; he describes the globalized world by saying:
Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion, or it will be killed. Every morning a lion wakes up. It knows it must outrun the slowest gazelle, or it will starve to death. It doesn't matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle. When the sun comes up, you better start running.
In the theory of the globalized world, the world is at odds with itself on an intellectual and economic basis: every nation in the world is struggling against all the others to achieve the most and push its economy the furthest. For better or for worse, Friedman’s “lion” and “gazelle” change daily, and the players vie to avoid becoming the metaphorical gazelle. This analogy is particularly insightful when considering the nature of intellectual property law in the newly globalized world.
Australian Intellectual Property Law
Australian intellectual property law heavily favors the creator of intellectual property of any kind. This is not to say that creators of a certain type of intellectual property retain full control over what they create, but intellectual property law in Australia does tend to favor the creator in terms of rights and use privileges. The Australian government defines intellectual property as follows:
The Convention Establishing the World Intellectual Property Organisation 1967 (WIPO)
defines intellectual property‘ as rights relating to:
‘Literary, artistic and scientific works
Performances of performing artists, phonograms and broadcasts
Inventions in all fields of human endeavour
Scientific discoveries
Industrial designs
Trade marks, service marks and commercial names and designations
Protection against unfair competition and
All other rights resulting from intellectual activity in the industrial, scientific, literary
or artistic fields.’
In Australia, there are distinct statutory regimes regulating the four core areas‘ of IP -
circuits, plant breeder‘s rights and assorted rights relating to logos and symbols.
Thus, the Australian intellectual property guidelines face similar problems to international standards for intellectual property guidelines: first, there is a large concern regarding how to protect commercial interests while simultaneously protecting creative, artistic, and cultural misappropriation of intellectual property. Next, there is a significant legal “gray area” when it comes to defining creative interests and legitimate creative uses for intellectual property. Technological advancements are of particular concern to many in the intellectual property protection field; because technology can be so lucrative, technological intellectual property must be protected. However, too much protection may harm technological advancement as a whole. Australian intellectual property law, then, is a delicate balancing act between the interests of the creator or creators and the interests of those who would use the intellectual property in question for the betterment of the world as a whole.
The TRIPS Agreement and International Intellectual Property Law
The World Trade Organization developed an international agreement regarding intellectual property in an attempt to quell some of the issues that have arisen in the attempt to balance the property rights of the creators with the rights of others to develop existing ideas and technologies. Archibugi and Filippetta write, “The ‘Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights’ (TRIPS) Agreement, signed in 1994, is a founding element of the WTO. TRIPS constitutes the most important attempt to establish a global harmonisation of Intellectual Property (IP) protection and enforcement, creating international standards for the protection of patents, copyrights, trademarks and design.” In short, the TRIPS Agreement was designed to allow for the protections of intellectual property rights on a global scale. However well-intentioned the solution, there are still issues with intellectual property rights on a global scale. Without a cohesive and coherent method for prosecuting offenders, there is little incentive for companies and individuals in nations without strict intellectual property controls to adhere to the standards set forth in the TRIPS Agreement.
The Problem of Intellectual Property in a Globalized World
Unlike a concrete good, an idea cannot be held or possessed to the exclusion of anyone else. When a company or individual releases his or her idea into the open marketplace, there is always a chance of someone else seeing and profiting from an idea. Within Australia, legal controls on intellectual property rights are good; individuals who follow the prescribed steps for legal protections of their ideas and technological developments are provided and afforded good legal protections against infringement. However, when moving into the global market, ideas are provided much less protection.
For the purposes of discussion, China is an excellent example regarding potential intellectual property issues that can arise from introducing a product on the global market. Not only is China one of the leading manufacturing locations due to its cheap labor and minimal legal restrictions on investment and development, but China is also one of the largest emerging markets in the world, along with India. Companies from around the world are investing in China in record numbers; these companies are also experience intellectual property theft at an incredible rate.
China’s political situation is still somewhat tenuous, and the concept of intellectual property has not permeated the culture to the extent that it has in the western world. For this reason, China is still rife with knock-off goods and technologies; it is a veritable wasteland of stolen and borrowed technologies. Firms who have had their technology or ideas stolen in China have little recourse, because the government is almost entirely unsympathetic to intellectual property claims. This is one of the major problems with agreements like the TRIPS Agreement-- it is nearly impossible to enforce an agreement like the TRIPS Agreement on a global scale.
Leading economic theorists on intellectual property indicate that the most important aspect of intellectual property considerations in the globalized world should be that the use of any intellectual property by another should be nonrivalrous and nonexcludable. This means that one person’s use of a piece of technology or idea does not reduce another’s ability to use the idea or technology; it also indicates that the idea or technology cannot be restricted from use without authorization. The purpose of this definition is to ensure that ideas and technologies are simultaneously free for use and development, but also protected. If one person or company’s use of another’s technology or idea diminishes another’s standing in some way, they may be in violation of the ethical and legal concept of intellectual property protections. This method of definition allows for the protection of intellectual property, but also for the development of intellectual property on a global scale.
Globalization has its negative aspects, and intellectual property rights are certainly more at-risk in a globalized world. However, these negative aspects are certainly reduced in the grand scheme when considering the different cultural and technological perspectives that people from around the world can bring to the table when considering the solution to some kind of intellectual problem.
Summary and Conclusions
Intellectual property law, as it exists today, requires significant oversight on the part of governmental bodies to be successful. However, the globalized world does not allow for the same type of oversight that may have been successful in the past. There are too many options for those interested in sidestepping and bypassing the current legal definition of intellectual property; people interested in stealing technologies will always be able to find a way to do so.
Instead of focusing on the protection of ideas and the possession of ideas, the best solution for intellectual property rights in the future is to develop a system that allows for ideas to be simultaneously used in nonrivalrous and nonexcludable ways. This will allow for further development of technologies and ideas, while still protecting the original creators of these ideas. Clearly, this is a difficult process, and will require serious consideration on the part of legal professionals, both domestically and internationally; however, in the long run, this is the ideal solution for a world that is becoming increasingly globalized and integrated.
References
Alexandra George, Globalization and Intellectual Property (Ashgate Publishing Co, 2006)
Australian Government’s Attorney General’s Office, Australian Government Intellectual Property Manual (2012)
Daniele Archibugi and Andrea Filippetti, “The Globalization of Intellectual Property Rights: Four Learned Lessons and Four Theses” (2010) 1(2) Global Policy Issues 137,138
Joseph E. Stiglitz, Globalization and Its Discontents (W.W. Norton & Company, 1st Edition, 2003)
Michael Finger, Philip Schuler, Poor People’s Knowledge: Promoting Intellectual Property in Developing Countries (World Bank and Oxford University Press, 1st Edition, 2004)
Thomas L. Friedman, The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1st Edition, 2005)
