IP and the knowledge economy: an agenda

In 36 minutes the IPKat will be attending a select gathering to mark the launch, by David Lammy (the UK's Minister of State for Higher Education and Intellectual Property), of a new programme which seeks to define how intellectual property underpins the UK’s Knowledge Economy.

Right: "Now that we've solved the IP and knowledge economy issue", said Teddy, "what about another cup of tea?"

According to the press release,

"... the major international programme and research agenda will investigate issues seen as vital to our economic well being. This report sees the Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property Policy (SABIP) and the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) building on a programme of work defined in June by a Forum of international experts from around the world.

To drive this work forward - as outlined in The Economic Value of Intellectual Property: Research Agenda and Plan of Action - they are establishing a number of national and international partnerships and work to clarify the role of IP in innovation and economic growth has already begun.

David Lammy, said: “Maximising the value of intellectual property is vital to the creative and innovative growth of the UK economy. Globalisation and the digital revolution are making us re-examine the current IP system and opinions are divided on how fair and useful it remains. This new research agenda looks to fill the gaps in our knowledge and provide a better understanding of the impact of IP on innovation and growth of the UK.”

To begin to turn the research agenda into tangible and deliverable research, SABIP and the IPO can also announce:

• That they will partner with the UK Innovation Research Centre (UK~IRC) to deliver focused policy events and fellowships to begin seeding research projects.

• Work with National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts (NESTA) and other partners to build on their Innovation Growth Accounting framework to quantify intellectual property rights within the wider economy.

• Conduct value chain analysis to assess how copyright value-chains or networks are affected by digital media and the implications of this for copyright law.

Right: the copyright-value chain is a bit like a daisy chain, but it's made out of copyright-values rather than the traditional British daisy.

Joly Dixon, Chairman of SABIP, said: “SABIP was set up just over a year ago to provide the independent research needed to inform IP-related policy making. And this ambitious but achievable new research agenda will provide the conceptual framework, reliable data, and analysis that has not to-date existed in this field of work. I hope it will encourage others, not only in the UK but around the world, to collaborate with us in this work.

Economic growth is dependent on technological change and wider creativity, both of which are key drivers of innovation. This research agenda aims to generate a better insight into the relationship between intellectual property rights (IPRs) and innovation and how these influence economic growth – information which will provide the robust evidence-base needed to underpin policy-making".

Says the IPKat, there does seem to be a lot of partnering going on. If things carry on at this rate, we might even start to learn something. Merpel says, it's good to see the firm commitment to a "robust evidence-base". Isn't it just such a commitment that has given us the artist's resale right, the three-strikes proposals, and some clear direction on what to do about orphan works ...?
IP and the knowledge economy: an agenda IP and the knowledge economy: an agenda Reviewed by Jeremy on Thursday, November 26, 2009 Rating: 5


  1. Or, to put it in less jargon-laden terms:

    • having a meeting with another quango to organise another meeting like today's, and to appoint someone to think about other things they might want to think about

    • having a meeting with further quangos to think about ways of counting intellectual property rights

    • thinking about how much money people make out of copyright, guessing how much less they make because of the internet, and thinking about whether the odd infringement action might help them make more

    Cynical? Moi? Well at least I now know where my taxes go.

  2. After Lammy's consultations and such, I'd wager that we'll still have a substantial majority of people who are information have-nots, deprived of information that should be in the public domain thanks to pernicious use of copyright laws.

    The law doesn't allow land enclosure; why does it allow enclosure of information?


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.