Skip to content

The Purpose of Intellectual Property Law

Over the years, I have run into many people that don’t understand the point of intellectual property law. They think it restricts the free flow of information. Recently, many newspapers have included articles claiming that patents are actually preventing the distribution of the vaccines against the Sars-CoV-2 virus. So if intellectual property law restricts the free flow of information and is preventing the end of a pandemic, then what is the point? 

Well, at the outset, I disagree that intellectual property law has caused information to be constricted and the pandemic to be extended. On balance, the easiest answer to the purpose of intellectual property law is to protect the creator of the expression of his or her ideas. 

The Purpose of Trademark Law

Interestingly, trademark law has a slightly different purpose. The purpose of trademark law is to protect the consumer from confusion. The consumer needs to have a good understanding of the source of the goods or services being purchased. So, for trademark law, the purpose isn’t to protect the owner of the trademark, rather to protect the consumer. Ultimately, the owner of the trademark does receive some benefits of trademark ownership, but that isn’t the primary purpose. Part of the reason for this difference is that trademark came along separately (and later) than both copyright and patent protection. So it had a completely different objective.  

The Purpose of Copyright and Patent

For copyright and patent, the purpose truly is to protect the creator of the expression of ideas. For copyright, when an artist or author puts his or her ideas in a tangible form of expression, then under a natural law philosophy, the author has protection against someone else copying his or her work. 

For patent, when an inventor creates a new, useful, and nonobvious invention, then the inventor may apply for patent protection. Again, the purpose of a patent is to protect the inventor’s expression of his or her invention. In exchange for this protection, the inventor is required to disclose how the invention works. The idea is that this information adds to the body of scientific knowledge.  

Nonetheless, there are still those that argue that information is constricted by this paradigm. The problem with this argument is that when you look at countries that have strong intellectual property protections, they tend to have better economic performance than countries that do not have such strong protection. Of course, this correlation doesn’t necessarily mean causation. But in my view, it is compelling evidence. Further, many who argue against intellectual property tend to get upset when their expression of an idea or ideas is stolen. What is the incentive to create when your work can be easily stolen without any intellectual property protection?  

If you would like more information about patents or trademarks, please consider joining us for Pirate Fight Club. Click here to join the Pirate Fight Club Facebook group