Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Scholarship Chronologically

Series

Property rights

Discipline
Publication Year

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

Note On The Four Faces Of The "Sharing Benefits" Issue With Handwritten - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon Dec 1985

Note On The Four Faces Of The "Sharing Benefits" Issue With Handwritten - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

Any overall theory must first be capable of describing what it seeks to theorize about. This article will now do that. In giving a taxonomy, the article may be making its greatest contribution, Lockean theory will hardly be the last world in intellectual property unification theory. But I will have at lest set the terms for debate so we can finally speak clearly to each other, articulate the issues, see their implications.


Notes On "Natural Property Rights" In Products Of The Mind: Lock And Contemporary Controversies In Intellectual Property - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon Aug 1985

Notes On "Natural Property Rights" In Products Of The Mind: Lock And Contemporary Controversies In Intellectual Property - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

No abstract provided.


Conversation With Lee Bollinger - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon May 1985

Conversation With Lee Bollinger - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

First, Lee Bollinger (and others) seem to feel that the misappropriation "urge" makes sense when seen against a background where most things one creates DO get property treatment. Lee therefore says it's my burden as a writer to explain why this area is different--both to succeed in making a case clear, AND to create barriers between this area and others. Essentially, he argues, people will be afraid that less-than-complete property here will erode property elsewhere.


Outline Of Desert Theory: The No-Harm Notion - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1985

Outline Of Desert Theory: The No-Harm Notion - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

In seeking to understand what lies behind the court's apparent eagerness to grant property in intellectual products, a helpful starting place would seem to be the labour theory of property found in Locke's SECOND TREATIES OF GOVERNMENT. Speaking most generally, the theory suggests that a person who successfully uses his to her efforts to make useful those things which no one else has used or claimed may be rewarded with ownership of the things. The common law has long used a simpler variant of such a principle, awarding ownership to those who take possession of unclaimed physical resources. Creators of …


Workshop Notes On New Property Rights - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon Jan 1985

Workshop Notes On New Property Rights - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

There’s a growth-by-accretion of new property rights, largely pushed by an unjust enrichment principles. Such a principle is itself without definable 1imits in an interrelated society. My task: looking at this trend from different vantage pts, other than that of pure desert, is the trend a good one. My view is that by and large it is not, but what we’ll discuss today falls far short of any such broad conclusion.


Note On The House Of Cards: Revisiting Calabresi's Cathedral - 1984, Wendy J. Gordon Sep 1984

Note On The House Of Cards: Revisiting Calabresi's Cathedral - 1984, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

No one has taught us as much about law and economics as Calabresi, and nowhere so much as in the "Property Rights" article he wrote with Douglas Melamed twenty years ago. While the insights of that piece still retain their clarifying power, it's time for a reassessment. In giving us a newly empowered vocabulary and a mode of analysis, Calabresi and Melamed gave us a somewhat flawed picture of the world.


Note On The Problem Of Flexible Standards - 1983, Wendy J. Gordon Dec 1983

Note On The Problem Of Flexible Standards - 1983, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

My basic contention is that courts have been giving plaintiffs tort and property rights in intangible without any greater justification than that those persons had “created” the intangible.