Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1588214
 
 

Footnotes (345)



 


 



Left-Brain versus Right-Brain: Competing Conceptions of Creativity in Intellectual Property Law


Gregory N. Mandel


Temple University - James E. Beasley School of Law

May 18, 2010

U.C. Davis Law Review, Vol. 44, p. 283, 2010
Temple University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2010-8

Abstract:     
An ongoing debate at the heart of intellectual property law pits those who argue for efficiency objectives versus those who seek to advance other social goals. Proponents of the former model focus on the need for intellectual property regimes to provide incentives, while proponents of the latter aspire to protect natural rights or secure an environment for greater human flourishing. Typically lost to both observers and participants in these disputes is that most conceptions of intellectual property actually share a common ambition - the desire to promote creativity. Promoting creativity serves both the incentive goals of intellectual property and advances more holistic personal, cultural, and social interests.

Psychological, neurobiological, and cultural research now provide a wealth of information on how to actually promote creativity. Unfortunately, intellectual property law has failed to recognize these insights, instead remaining moored in doctrine derived from archaic stereotypes about creativity and the creative process. We see these distorting stereotypes, for example, in the law concerning joint authors and joint inventors. Based on historical, textual, temporal, and comparative law evidence, this article argues that joint creator law has evolved, at least in part, not from its traditionally identified sources, but from commonly held stereotypes about left-brain scientists versus right-brain artists. Modern research shows that these stereotypes of creativity are not only false, but that as a result, joint creator law specifically, and intellectual property law more generally, likely do not promote progress to the extent feasible, hindering both creativity and valuable collaboration in important contexts. Leveraging these interdisciplinary teachings yields valuable insight for how to revise patent and copyright law to better serve their creative objectives.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 79

Keywords: joint inventor, joint author, creativity, intellectual property law, artist, scientist

JEL Classification: O34

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: April 13, 2010 ; Last revised: November 24, 2010

Suggested Citation

Mandel, Gregory N., Left-Brain versus Right-Brain: Competing Conceptions of Creativity in Intellectual Property Law (May 18, 2010). U.C. Davis Law Review, Vol. 44, p. 283, 2010; Temple University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2010-8. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1588214

Contact Information

Gregory Mandel (Contact Author)
Temple University - James E. Beasley School of Law ( email )
1719 N. Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19122
United States
(215) 204-2381 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 3,261
Downloads: 595
Download Rank: 23,898
Footnotes:  345
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.406 seconds