This post is by Jaakko Miettinen, a PhD researcher in CREATe at the University of Glasgow, summarising discussion of his…
Post by Sheona Mary Lockhart Burrow (PhD Candidate, University of Glasgow)
The CREATe Studio reading group met again on Thursday 20th March. The topic of discussion was feminist theory in IP law. There is a small but growing literature on feminist theories of IP and the paper for discussion raised a number of interesting questions about how to carry out empirical research from the perspective of feminist legal theory.
Ronan Deazley voiced concerns about the difficulties of carrying out multidisciplinary research in this field without a proper understanding of both the relevant IP law and jurisdictional implications. Researchers engaging in this type of research need to familiarise themselves with both the relevant case law and statutes, as well as relevant critical and feminist legal theories. For example, without a proper grasp of how copyright law treats joint and multiple authors, it is difficult to properly understand how feminist theories about authorship may relate to copyright. Fortunately for those working within CREATe, access to legal specialists should not be a barrier.
On Tuesday 18th February we organised a joint reading group session with colleagues from CCPR (normally branded as CREATe Studio)….
CREATe Studio, an interdisciplinary reading group, met for the first time on 17 October 2013 to discuss the BBC Radio broadcast The Sins of Literature: Thou Shalt Not Steal. The broadcast consulted with authors regarding their perspectives on plagiarism of their works. Each author held slightly different views on plagiarism, and a main factor for whether an author would approve of or allow direct copying of a work related to whether the work was somehow transformed or used in a way that did not overlap with the author’s market, e.g., exactly copying a passage from a “poppy, airport, nonfiction book” and using it in a Broadway play was appreciated by the original author. However, all authors agreed that the author’s voice is the most unique and important part of the work to protect, posing a challenge for legal systems due to the nebulous nature of the author’s voice.