by Raizel Liebler
businesses and individuals engaged in creative or innovative work achieve personal and professional goals–autonomy, productive relationships, and revenue–under misaligned and ill-fitting IP regimes. … IP law reformers might consider formalizing the informal restraint IP rights holders demonstrate when they tolerate certain kinds of infringement, permit uses that would otherwise require authorization, and generally underenforce their IP rights. (104)
People crave work and relationships that are remote from wealth. … Separating the people who do and make everyday IP from those that benefit from it generates unproductive schisms and irrelevant rules. The misalignment of IP with the myriad goals creators and innovators pursue helps us identify and thereafter preserve only those IP rules that remain right for [creators]. (284-85)
Want more? Check out Jessica Silbey’s talk about the Eureka Myth from December 2014 at Berkman Center at Harvard University
Summary: Read this. This book will hopefully change the moral rights-ish arguments made about intellectual property rights in the United States. But even if not, you will learn much about the interaction (or not) of IP and the creative process, in the voices of those that create.