Abstract Being innovative is an important trait in our modern well, considering the high level of competition in today’s technological, arts and business markets. Individuals and companie

Intellectual Property: Suing for your Ideas

Business Law

Intellectual Property: Suing for your Ideas

Jennings, M. M. (2018). Business: Its Legal, Ethical, and Global Environment, 11th Edition. [Chegg]. Retrieved from https://ereader.chegg.com/#/books/9781337514392/

This book effectively illustrates how law and ethics apply to issues in the workplace and emphasizes real-world applications of Business Law. Jennings dedicates Chapter 15 of this book to Business and Intellectual Property Law. This book, and this chapter specifically is relevant to the research topic because it breaks down and explains the different types of Intellectual Property, talks about the legal protections for Intellectual Property and the remedies that exist for its protection.

Morin, J.-F., & Gold, E. R. (2016). International socialization at the state and individual levels: mixed evidence from intellectual property. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 29(4), 1375–1395. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umary.edu/10.1080/09557571.2016.1230734

Morin in this article analyses the seeming adoption of Intellectual Property norms on the international level. The article uses quantitative research to study international socialization processes, taking into account the influence of Intellectual Property norms. The article provides useful information on what Intellectual Property norms are and how they affect socialization processes.

Claeys, E. R. (2018). Intellectual property and practical reason. Jurisprudence, 9(2), 251–275. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umary.edu/10.1080/20403313.2017.1386460

This article introduces practical reason to Intellectual Property Law, and it shows how practical reason facilitates reasoning about the design of different legal Intellectual Property rights. This is relevant to the research because it explains in depth the concept of ‘practical reason’ and how it can affect the interpretation of Intellectual Property Law.

Haiyan Liu. (2018). In the shadow of criminalization: intellectual property criminal law, enforcement institutions and practices in China and the United States. Information & Communications Technology Law, 27(2), 185–220. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umary.edu/10.1080/13600834.2018.1458451

This article provides an extensive overview of major Intellectual Property rights, criminal enforcement agencies and judicial institutions. It also looks at criminal enforcement rates and trends, recent major enforcement operations, and the substantive criminal Intellectual Property Law and sentencing regulations in the United States and Chin. Relevant to the research is the information regarding the enforcement of Intellectual Property Law. Statistics on enforcement rates as well as case studies will be incorporated into the research paper.

Halbert, D. (2016). Intellectual property theft and national security: Agendas and assumptions. Information Society, 32(4), 256–268. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umary.edu/10.1080/01972243.2016.1177762

This article traces the U.S. government's efforts to establish and articulate Intellectual Property theft as a national security issue. Halbert in this article discusses the criminality of hacking, trade secret theft, among other violations and assesses the risk posed on a national level. Research for this paper will draw from various ideas on securitization of Intellectual Property, discussed in the article.

Wexler, R. (2018). Life, Liberty, and Trade Secrets: Intellectual Property in the Criminal Justice System. Stanford Law Review, 70(5), 1343–1429. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umary.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=130238908&site=ehost-live

This Article offers the first wide-ranging account of trade secret evidence in criminal cases and develops a framework to address the problems that result. In sharp contrast to the general view among trial courts and legislatures, this Article argues that trade secrets should not be privileged in criminal proceedings. Wexler’s research on the various aspects of trade secret criminal cases provides useful information on why trade secrets should not be priviledged.

Sheff, J. N. (2016). Values, Questions, and Methods in Intellectual Property. St. John’s Law Review, 90(3), 549–564. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umary.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=121908996&site=ehost-live

The article focuses on the differences in legal academic disciplines in Intellectual Property and how societies could reasonably disagree about whether patents produce more embarrassment than advantage. It mentions international legal instruments and bilateral and multilateral trade agreements on copyright law. It also mentions the different aspects of litigation costs for IP rights. Sheff in this article is provides an abundance of statistics and data analytics on Intellectual Property on an international level, which is relevant to the research topic.

Charming Betsy and the Intellectual Property Provisions of Trade Agreements. (2016). Harvard Law Review, 130(2), 701–722. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umary.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=120157245&site=ehost-live

The article discusses a Supreme Court case Murray v. Schooner Charming Betsy that occurred in 1804. The Harvard Law review uses this article to assess U.S. Intellectual Property and trade laws. The application of these laws to this case specifically sheds light on the perspectives of the plaintiff and the defendant. This article will be used to further understand the real life applications of Intellectual Property Law.