Basic Theories and Frontier Issues of Intellectual Property: Multi-dimensional Intellectual Property Library

Author: Li Yang
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2004-10-01
Features: It was quite beyond our expectation that the book The Rationality, Crisis, and Future Models of Intellectual Property published by the Law Press in July 2003 could have a revised edition within such a short period of less than a year. This book was a collaborative effort during my doctoral studies in Intellectual Property Law at the Peking University Law School, supervised by Professor Zheng Shengli. My junior colleagues included Zhu Li (now a doctoral student in Intellectual Property Law at the Peking University Law School), Wang Xing, and my good friend Xiao Zhiyuan (now a doctoral student in Intellectual Property Law at the Renmin University of China Law School). At that time, we were all obscure figures, and it took considerable effort to get the book published. Without the strong support of Mr. Liu Weijun of the Law Press and the renowned lawyer Qian Xiangyang of Huizhou, Guangdong, the book might still be gathering dust in a bookshelf! It is gratifying that not only was the book successfully published but also it was well-received by readers. What is even more comforting is that Mr. Yang Guanfeng of Zhongnan University of Economics and Law wrote an enthusiastic review titled The Light of Rational Reflection for this book, published in the Journal of Electronic Intellectual Property in Issue 3 of 2004. On behalf of the other three authors, I extend our sincere gratitude to readers and friends for their concern and support!
This revised edition incorporates some of our new insights. In Part III, we express our views on the contentious issue within the fields of Intellectual Property Law and Civil Law regarding the legislative framework of intellectual property and its role in the compilation of the Civil Code. Additionally, we have elevated the theoretical foundation of the first five chapters of Part III and propose a new cognitive model of intellectual property in Chapter 6, termed Statutory Intellectual Property, along with an initial exploration of its origins, functions, flaws, and potential remedies. The explicit introduction of this cognitive model will clarify many ambiguous perspectives in the field of Intellectual Property Law and provide significant guidance for future legislation.
We have also paid close attention to the recent serious reflections within the broader social sciences on the cultural impact and role. In Chapter 14 of Part III, we engage in thoughtful consideration, combining the book’s theme to tentatively address the intrinsic influence of culture on legal systems, particularly intellectual property. We attempt to examine international intellectual property protection models from a cultural perspective using interdisciplinary research methods and propose our own insights, including the intellectual property protection of traditional culture. We believe that culture is indeed a more explanatory method for analyzing intellectual property, but it is neither universal nor should it be overestimated.
Furthermore, we argue that the protection of creative intellectual achievements is not the sole institutional consideration in intellectual property law. Beyond reflecting on Locke’s labor theory of property rights, we must objectively evaluate the impact of investment on the publication and dissemination of works and establish corresponding legal institutional arrangements. The shift in perspective naturally broadens the scope of vision, and conclusions will inevitably differ—this is precisely the academic research attitude we aim to convey in this book.
Based on this, we chose databases as a starting point to reflect on the traditional, one-sided protection of originality and creation in copyright since the Statute of Anne. We have systematically summarized our preliminary thoughts, forming the article The Struggle and Entanglement Between Knowledge and Capital—A Database Protection Model to Transform the Foundation of Copyright as Section 6 of Chapter 15 in Part III. We believe that in this era of promoting the main melody and advocating diversity, the balancing point of interests in the intellectual property legal system is also moving away from a monolithic historical framework toward a more pluralistic direction—a new phenomenon that deserves close attention from both academia and the practical field.
Thought is a river, thought is an ocean. We yearn to splash ripples in this river with our solitude and self-consolation, and to merge them into the profound sea.