• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Faculty/ Researcher Works
    • Faculty/ Researcher Works
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Faculty/ Researcher Works
    • Faculty/ Researcher Works
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of TUScholarShareCommunitiesDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsGenresThis CollectionDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsGenres

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Help

    AboutPeoplePoliciesHelp for DepositorsData DepositFAQs

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    What Causes Polarization on IP Policy?

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    Mandel-JournalArticle-2018.pdf
    Size:
    463.6Kb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Genre
    Journal article
    Date
    2018
    Author
    Wittlin, Maggie Wittlin
    Ouellette, Lisa Larrimore
    Mandel, Gregory N.
    Subject
    Intellectual property law
    Law and society
    Public policy
    Public administration
    Permanent link to this record
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/6338
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    DOI
    http://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/6320
    Abstract
    Polarization on contentious policy issues is a problem of national concern for both hot-button cultural issues such as climate change and gun control and for issues of interest to more specialized constituencies. Cultural debates have become so contentious that in many cases people are unable to agree even on the underlying facts needed to resolve these issues. Here, we tackle this problem in the context of intellectual property (“IP”) law. Despite an explosion in the quantity and quality of empirical evidence about the IP system, IP policy debates have become increasingly polarized. This disagreement about existing evidence concerning the effects of the IP system hinders democratic deliberation and stymies progress. Based on a survey of U.S. IP practitioners, this Article investigates the source of polarization on IP issues, with the goal of understanding how to better enable evidence-based IP policymaking. We hypothesized that, contrary to intuition, more evidence on the effects of IP law would not resolve IP disputes but would instead exacerbate them. Specifically, IP polarization might stem from “cultural cognition,” a form of motivated reasoning in which people form factual beliefs that conform to their cultural predispositions and interpret new evidence in light of those beliefs. The cultural cognition framework has helped explain polarization over other issues of national concern, but it has never been tested in a private-law context. Our survey results provide support for the influence of cultural cognition, as respondents with a relatively hierarchical or individualistic worldview are more likely to believe strong patent protection is necessary to spur innovation. Additionally, having a hierarchical or individualistic worldview and also viewing patent rights as property rights may be a better predictor of patent strength preferences than either alone. Taken together, our findings suggest that individuals’ cultural preferences affect how they understand new information about the IP system. We discuss the implications of these results for fostering evidence-based IP policymaking, as well as for addressing polarization more broadly. For example, we suggest that empirical legal studies borrow from medical research by initiating a practice of advance registration of new projects — in which the planned methodology is publicly disclosed before data are gathered — to promote broader acceptance of the results.
    Citation
    Maggie Wittlin, Lisa Larrimore Ouellette, & Gregory N. Mandel, What Causes Polarization on IP Policy?, 52 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1193 (2018).
    Available at: https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/52/2/articles/
    Citation to related work
    UC Davis School of Law
    Has part
    UC Davis Law Review, Vol. 52
    ADA compliance
    For Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.edu
    Collections
    Faculty/ Researcher Works

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Temple University Libraries | 1900 N. 13th Street | Philadelphia, PA 19122
    (215) 204-8212 | scholarshare@temple.edu
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.