Knowledge and culture commons • "refers to information, data, and content that is collectively owned and managed by a community of users" (wikipedia.com) • are opposed to thinking of knowledge and culture as private property and a commodity Knowledge and culture are very different from what we have been talking about so far. • natural resources and public spaces -> material • "information, data, and content" -> immaterial Rivalry vs. Non-rivalry • material goods are scarce: if one person uses them, someone else can't – natural resources and public spaces are rivalrous • immaterial goods are not scarce: the more people who use them, the better for everyone – knowledge and culture are not rivalrous Depletion? • there is no "Tragedy of the Culture and Knowledge Commons" • maybe a "Tragedy of the Anti-Commons"? Human creativity • natural resource commons: natural input and human-made output • culture and knowledge commons: human-made input and output • potential commodity and constructive force • "Acquiring and discovering knowledge is both a social process and a deeply personal process" (Ostrom and Hess, 2007) Culture and knowledge and communities • culture and knowledge are often created by communities – "automatic" or "default" commons • the community exists before the resource • the resource defines the values and norms (culture) of the community – a community is largely defined by culture The special danger to culture and knowledge commons • if knowledge and culture are commons, then everyone can shape the community they live in • enclosure can give some more power than others in defining communitiy values and identity • enclosure of culture can change a communities identity and values An important intuition Most people think that culture is not anyone's private property. A super short history • culture and knowledge used to be a commons everywhere • a way for the kings to censor freedom of expression • development of copyright starting in the 18th century • weak and spotty protection for a long time • continuous strengthening of copyright and patents in the 19th and 20th century – length of protection, types of works covered, scope of protection Intellectual property The modern history of knowledge and culture commons is to a large extent one of continuous privatisation (enclosure). • Intellectual property makes creations of the mind private property.

Patents discoveries and inventions

Copyright music, literature, videos, architecture, and other artistic works

Trademarks words, phrases, symbols, and designs The right to exclusion • The essential fact about (intellectual) property • IP is about control. The owner of IP can exclude people from culture and knowledge or insist on certain conditions (e.g. payment). Patents • are about ideas • need to be useful, new, and non-obvious • need to be registered • last for 20 years Copyright • terms of copyright law – work: the created piece (can be almost anything) – author: the creator • is about expressions (not ideas) • needs to be original • protects works automatically as soon as they are published • lasts (usually) for the life of the author + 70 years Why intellectual property? • There are two major arguments

Society-based argument IP is good for society as a whole. • IP allows creators to make money with their creations • because of money they will create more and better things • from this most people will profit, even if some can't afford buying the products

Author-based argument IP is good for authors. • what creators make belongs to them • therefore creators should have certain rights and decide how their creations are used But... - some arguments against IP • creators produce because they like to be creative/express themselves/help others/be known • creators can make money even without IP/don't even make money with IP • the best creations are not necessarily those that are made to earn lots of money • the interests of society's poorest are important • creators never create something entirely new, they need a society and culture to build on