東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

"To Promote the Progress"? Explainin...

Michael, Gabriel J.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

"To Promote the Progress"? Explaining the Global Diffusion of Intellectual Property Law.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	"To Promote the Progress"? Explaining the Global Diffusion of Intellectual Property Law./
作者:	Michael, Gabriel J.
面頁冊數:	368 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 75-12(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International75-12A(E).
標題:	Political Science, General. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3631404
ISBN:	9781321099638

"To Promote the Progress"? Explaining the Global Diffusion of Intellectual Property Law.
Michael, Gabriel J.

"To Promote the Progress"? Explaining the Global Diffusion of Intellectual Property Law. - 368 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 75-12(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The George Washington University, 2014.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Why do very different states adopt remarkably similar intellectual property laws? From Australia to Zambia, France to Fiji, and the United States to Uzbekistan, countries around the world have to a large extent harmonized laws protecting intangible goods. Such harmonization is puzzling given the extreme variation in domestic political and economic factors between states. States often appear to adopt intellectual property laws that provide no net benefit, and may even result in a net loss. What explains such patterns of adoption?

ISBN: 9781321099638Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017391
Political Science, General.

"To Promote the Progress"? Explaining the Global Diffusion of Intellectual Property Law.
LDR:03424nmm a2200337 4500 001 2056382
005 20150526083645.5
008 170521s2014 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321099638
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3631404
035 $a AAI3631404
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Michael, Gabriel J. $3 3170136
245 1 0 $a "To Promote the Progress"? Explaining the Global Diffusion of Intellectual Property Law.
300 $a 368 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 75-12(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Susan K. Sell.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The George Washington University, 2014.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Why do very different states adopt remarkably similar intellectual property laws? From Australia to Zambia, France to Fiji, and the United States to Uzbekistan, countries around the world have to a large extent harmonized laws protecting intangible goods. Such harmonization is puzzling given the extreme variation in domestic political and economic factors between states. States often appear to adopt intellectual property laws that provide no net benefit, and may even result in a net loss. What explains such patterns of adoption?
520 $a I argue that the global spread and significant convergence of intellectual property laws is best understood as a form of policy diffusion. States generally do not develop such laws to respond to domestic policy concerns. Rather, they are frequently coerced into adopting laws that domestic actors oppose. Furthermore, when states voluntarily adopt such laws, they often craft them in response to other intellectual property laws that they have been coerced into adopting.
520 $a Using a mixed-method research design, I demonstrate that states have adopted remarkably similar intellectual property laws because they have been influenced by other states. I test competing theoretical mechanisms of policy diffusion against one another, and against alternative explanations. Specifically, I examine the spread of clinical trial data protection laws, laws protecting the knowledge of indigenous and traditional communities, and copyright limitations and exceptions modeled after the U.S. doctrine of fair use. Quantitative analyses using original data on policy adoptions demonstrate the plausibility and generalizability of theoretical mechanisms of diffusion, while qualitative data, including leaked diplomatic cables and dozens of interviews conducted in Geneva, Brussels, Washington, and Cape Town establish the operation of such mechanisms in specific cases.
520 $a I find significant evidence that the widespread adoption of harmonized intellectual property law is due to coercion, largely attributable to the United States and the European Union. I also find evidence that some policy adoptions result from superficial learning and imitation, in both cases motivated by a desire to counterbalance coercive demands in other areas. Surprisingly, there is little evidence that countries adopt intellectual property laws in order to increase their competitive advantages.
590 $a School code: 0075.
650 4 $a Political Science, General. $3 1017391
650 4 $a Political Science, International Relations. $3 1669648
650 4 $a Intellectual Property. $3 782112
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0601
690 $a 0513
710 2 $a The George Washington University. $b Political Science. $3 1043878
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 75-12A(E).
790 $a 0075
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2014
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3631404