Reflection Paper about Intellectual Property

What I Understood about IPR Before this Course

Before taking this course, my knowledge about Intellectual Property Rights was severely limited, especially concerning the different types of IPRs that are in existence. When I undertook to begin this course, I only had a vague idea of what intellectual property meant because I knew that I had interacted with some types of this property in my day to day life. Foremost, I was certain that IP had to be a kind of property which belongs to a person, whether real or artificial. Secondly, I knew that the word ‘intellectual’ connoted property that comes into existence by a person exercising their mental abilities. Lastly, I knew that these kinds of the property would have to be stored in a manner that allowed others to access them and for regulatory bodies to be able to offer protections and restrictions around their use.

Buy this excellently written paper or order a fresh one from acemyhomework.com

In this regard, the types of IPRs that I knew were rights over music, video games, movies, literature, software, social media and inventions of different kinds. Since I am a consumer of music and movies, I had a hazy idea of copyright and what it meant to breach copyright. More specifically, I was aware that the producer of music or video content had copyrights over that content and that for others to use this material, they would require authorization in the form of licenses. Also, I had encountered the rights of authors, especially those of academic material and the rules that attended the use of these authors’ works. For example, plagiarism was one of the things we were warned against as violating the rights of authors of the academic material that we used for our course work. Plagiarism entails the use of someone else’s ideas in one’s academic work without giving due credit to the author of the work, Therefore, if someone does not sufficiently identify the author of the material in their work so that the ideas appear as their own instead of the author’s, then they have committed plagiarism.

In addition to the above, I had also engaged extensively in social media, and I was therefore aware of the intangible intellectual property that is in wide use around us. Since it was evident that there were creators behind every social media tool, it became readily apparent that the people who created and developed these tools had a claim over them as their owners and that they were also entitled to a share of the income that was generated by their use.

What Surprised Me Most About IPR Law

One of the main things that surprised me about IPR law is that although I felt that I already knew many things about IPRs, there was still much more to learn. For instance, I was able to understand the proper terms and legal frameworks that provided for and regulated the different types of intellectual property. In my opinion, it was note-worthy that many international conventions sought to protect intellectual property rights and which had been developed over a long period. By interacting with these international conventions, I was able to appreciate the importance that was attached to the intellectual property and the seriousness with which rights attaching to these kinds of property are protected. This seriousness was also replicated at the state level where I learnt that in Singapore, copyright infringement is even criminalized.

Also, I was surprised that within the various types of IPRs, many more principles guided and protected those rights. Intellectual Property Law, therefore, did not just develop for the sole purpose of protecting the rights of the creators of intellectual property, but also to serve common interests to spur development. An apt example of this is in the protection of copyright. It was intriguing to me that in copyright protection, there are numerous exceptions under which the use of someone else’s copyright may not be regarded as the infringement of copyright. For instance, use of copyright material in an educational institution is not regarded as copyright infringement for the practical purpose of ensuring that learning takes place effectively and without fear of being sanctioned for referring to academic material.

Another similar example is in the case of religious performances. It would be absurd if the use of the material in a religious setting were considered to be a violation of the copyright of the author. In line with the discussion above, I was also surprised by how many considerations one needs to have when attempting to understand the co-relation between Intellectual Property Rights, the laws that protect them, and other branches of law.

Furthermore, I was surprised to discover that even though I am tempted to view IP as a special form of property, it is nonetheless property and can be dealt with in more or less the same manner as other kinds of property. For example, one can buy and sell IP just the same way as they may sell the tangible property. Also, the owner of the IP can create a license for another party to make use of the IP. Furthermore, like other types of property, IP can also be mortgaged, or given out as a donation or a gift (Bosworth, 2014). Even though the processes and technical details through which these transactions are effected may vary in IP, it is nonetheless evident that IP is a form of property which provides the owner with more or less the same rights as those that are available to other owners of the property.

How I Will Use My Learning in the Course and How I Think the Course Can Be Improved

At a more basic level, I will use the learning that I have received to make myself more aware and respectful of the IPRs of others. This awareness will enable me to utilize the works of others without violating their rights and in a way that is approved of by law. Furthermore, at a personal level, this knowledge helps me to gain a better insight into the IP that I use almost on a daily basis. Such knowledge is not only important for academic and professional purposes, but also for the enrichment of one’s understanding of the world around them. Similarly, I will also use the lessons learnt to watch out for instances when I witness any infringement of intellectual property rights, especially by the people that I interact with on a day to day basis.

At a professional level, knowledge in the different kinds of IP and their legal protection is important for the workplace in that it will ensure proper and legal use of IP in the workplace. Like in many institutions, various workplaces also find themselves in need of using different IP like reference material by various authors and social media for purposes of advertisements. Therefore, a healthy understanding of the kind of IP that I may have to interact with in the workplace is good preparation for a productive and efficient contribution to the institution in which I am employed.

Also, this course has opened me up to understanding that innovations and IP may be generated within the work environment based on the kind of work that the employees are involved in. This may be in the invention of new, creative and easier ways of getting work done, or in the generation of material like publications that can be used for future reference. With this in mind, it becomes readily-apparent that there is also need for me to consider entering into agreements with my future employers concerning the sharing of the proceeds that may be received from the IPRs, which may be created from time to time at the workplace. In addition to these agreements, it is also important for an employer to create an environment that promotes and fosters the creation of IP. When the environment is conducive for creativity and innovation, this leads to the ultimate benefit of not only the employee, but also the employer because any innovation in the workplace that improves the output of the employees also improves the output of the organization as a whole and facilitates the achievement of the organization’s goals and objectives (Ramcharan, 2012). Therefore, as an employer, I would remain attentive to the potential that exists in my workforce and aim to tap into that ability and potential to encourage and foster a culture of innovation in my workplace.

What is more, this knowledge may be used as a foundation for further studies in the area of IPRs. The course was meant to be introductory and to cater for the specific needs of learners who had not had a chance to interact with Intellectual Property Law. Since a good foundation was laid concerning what IPRs are and the law that surrounds them, this knowledge may be used for building experience and more knowledge in the area. Admittedly, many other types of IP were not discussed during the course. Moreover, the types of IP that were covered were not discussed fully and thoroughly. Besides the introduction into these types of IP, there may need to delve deeper into the specifics of each type of IP, its constituents, the principles upon which it is governed and the laws that regulate it. From such further studies, I could choose to do consultancy work on the area of IP, apply the knowledge gained at the job that I find myself in, consider academic work in the area or a teaching career. Based on this discussion, one of the most important changes that I think this course would benefit from would be to increase its depth a bit more so that more types of IP are covered even if in an introductory manner.

What I Think is Wrong About IP Law and What I Think Should Be Changed

First, my interaction with this course brought to my attention the various international conventions that have been developed for the protection of IP rights. Furthermore, the discussion also made it abundantly clear that many states have fashioned their IP Law after the international conventions. The benefit of this is that states have not had to begin creating laws from scratch. Having an idea of what other states are doing regarding the protections afforded to the holders of IP has made it easier for Singapore to also create its laws around this area. However, the disadvantage of such a motif of legal development is that the laws may not be tailored properly for the people that they are meant to regulate (Startup Decisions, 2016). Adoption of international laws may leave a gap between the actual laws and the real needs of the people that the laws are meant to serve.

Also, this course brought to my attention the fact that IP law is both wide and complex. This is not a positive factor considering how widespread the use of IP is. For property that is used on a daily basis and by almost everyone in a state, the level of literacy and understanding of the laws that regulate the use of this property is law. Therefore, laws surrounding IP should be simplified and summarized so that they do not end up being too convoluted for the audience that is aimed at. Ensuring that a majority of the population understands these laws will not only be good for securing compliance with these laws, but also for encouraging the population to embrace IP as a form of owning wealth since they will better understand how this property is protected (Simon, 2005). On the whole, it should be the endeavor of all stakeholders involved in championing for more extensive and in depth understanding IP law among the general population.