The Philosophy Café

The Philosophy Café at Harvard Book Store is a monthly gathering meant for the informal, relaxed, philosophical discussion of topics of mutual interest to participants. No particular expertise is required to participate, only a desire to explore philosophy and its real-world applications.

The Philosophy Café is held on the third Wednesday of each month, from 7:30-9:30 pm, in the Used Book department on the lower level of Harvard Book Store.

Topic of Discussion for February:

Intellectual Property concerns the treatment of creations of the mind, like inventions and  literary and artistic works, as if they were property. Of course such products of the mind are different from tangible property in many ways. Intellectual property is not subject to scarcity like tangible property. A single idea can be used by any number of people simultaneously without being diminished. So while our society generally supports commerce in intellectual property, most of the debate on intellectual property centers around determining the legitimate reasons for granting protections to creators and thus limiting the use of IP by others.

The importance of IP in our society has grown immensely over the last decades. Patents originally granted primarily for mechanical devices have been extended to many new categories, including even living things, genes, and many abstract ideas. Copyrights now cover not just the literal work of authorship but entire franchises of characters, story lines, and personalities. Consequently businesses specifically built around exploiting these protections have flourished and now pervade our culture and society in ways impossible in a less IP-centric world.

In this cafe meeting we will discuss the concepts underlying Intellectual Property and the many issues surrounding it. Here are some of the issues we will be raising:

1. On what principle should we protect IP? Is it because creators have a fundamental right or only to the extent we believe it is good policy?

• "It is just as wrong to steal intellectual property as it is to break into a home, steal a car, or rob a bank. " --US Patent and Trademark Office website http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ahrpa/opa/museum/1intell.htm

See Also: US Patent and Trademark Office curriculum in IP for High School students: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ahrpa/opa/kids/icreatm_guide_hs.pdf

•  US Constitution: " To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." Article I, Sect 8, Clause 8.

• Strong IP protection is bad policy. ( Video) Brigitte Andersen, Shackling the Digital Economy Means Less for Everyone: http://www.bbk.ac.uk/management/our-staff/academics/andersen/inaugural-lecture-shackling-the-digital-economy

• Background Reading: Property and Ownership in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/property/

2. What is the nature of the 'Public Domain'? Do ideas, writings, and art of the past properly belong to the public or are they public only because they can't be attributed reliably , like a giant lost and found?

3. Should things found in nature such as genes, plants, and animals be patentable? What about ideas as in mathematics, software, and business practices?

• Ethical implications of Gene patents in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/human-genome/#EthImpHumGenPro

• Patents have been ganted for such simple ideas as one-click shopping, pop-up windows, targeted banner ads, and even the hyperlink. This has led to the 'patent-busting project conducted by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.  https://w2.eff.org/patent/wp.php

4. What is the proper extent of copyrights? Should they simply protect the literal work or the work and all its related ideas? Should there be a time limit on copyrights and if so, on what basis should it be set?

• The Wind Done Gone controversy: Does a retelling of Gone With the Wind from the perspective of slaves infringe the original copyright? Can Margaret Mitchell's heirs legitimately bar its publication? See Wikipedia, The Wind Done Gone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wind_Done_Gone

• Mark Helperin, A Great Idea Lives Forever. Shouldn't Its Copyright? http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/opinion/20helprin.html?_r=1

• Rebuttal: Against Perpetual Copyright http://wiki.lessig.org/index.php/Against_perpetual_copyright

• Lawrence Lessig, In Defense of Piracy http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122367645363324303.html