Difference between revisions of "Mun (2009)"

From Copyright EVIDENCE
m (1 revision imported)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Source  
+
{{MainSource
 +
|Source={{Source
 
|Name of Study=Mun (2009)
 
|Name of Study=Mun (2009)
|Author=Mun, S.-H.
+
|Author=Mun, S.-H.
 
|Title=Culture-related aspects of intellectual property rights: A cross-cultural analysis of copyright
 
|Title=Culture-related aspects of intellectual property rights: A cross-cultural analysis of copyright
 
|Year=2009
 
|Year=2009
 
|Full Citation=MUN, S.-H. 2009. Culture-related aspects of intellectual property rights: A cross-cultural analysis of copyright. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 69, 2925.
 
|Full Citation=MUN, S.-H. 2009. Culture-related aspects of intellectual property rights: A cross-cultural analysis of copyright. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 69, 2925.
 +
|Abstract=This study presented a critical investigation of the mainstream neo-liberal approach to global intellectual property rights protection. There is a widespread but incorrect perception in the contemporary intellectual property policy regime that ineffective copyright protection in developing countries is primarily an institutional problem deriving from the lack of economic capacity and jurisprudential systems. Arguing that the conventional policy regime offers only a limited account for global copyright protection, this study aimed to show that inadequate copyright protection is not only an institutional but also historically contingent cultural problem. For the purpose, the present study conducted two phases of investigation: (1) a cross- national data analysis of software piracy and (2) comparative historical analysis of authorship in England and China. The first study empirically examined the key determinants of software piracy in the contemporary international market. From multivariate statistical analyses of international data, the study attempted to identify significant factors facilitating software piracy. Special attention was paid to identifying the influence of national culture in software piracy when other institutional factors were controlled. The results showed that a combined outcome of multiple factors including national income, institutional capacity for property protection, in-group collectivist cultural practices, and attitudes toward international intellectual property protection explains the software piracy problem. The second study aimed to provide a more in-depth understanding of the historical linkage between copyright and culture. It traced the historical formation of authorship in English and Chinese print culture to examine whether and why there emerged contrasting conceptions of authorship between them. The findings showed that there was a distinctive historical divergence of material, ideological, and institutional contexts of print culture, which led to different authorship conceptions between England and China. This implies that authorship as the fundamental cultural basis of modern copyright law was not a natural and universal phenomenon inevitably arising from the printing press but rather historically and culturally contingent.
 +
|Authentic Link=https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/17888
 +
|Link=https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/handle/2152/17888/muns.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
 +
|Reference=Hofstede (1991); Menski (2006); Drahos (1996); Richards (2002); Hettinger (1989);
 +
|Plain Text Proposition=* The conventional policy research suggested that strong IP protection leads to the overall
 +
economic development. Considering various theoretical and methodological drawbacks
 +
in the conventional model, a number of critical scholars challenged the mainstream IP
 +
policy argument. They argued that IP protection is not a precondition of the economic
 +
development but an outcome of various national contexts.
 +
 +
* The level of IP protection responds to differences in the development of national economies: countries with high income
 +
levels are likely to have stronger protection. The rationale for this assumption is straightforward: countries with a higher level of income are able to provide stronger protection of information products simply because they can afford legitimate products. Furthermore, since the legal enforcement involves large costs for judicial systems, policing and experts, depending on financial capacity, richer countries are expected to enforce the law better than poorer ones. For all these reasons, this study hypothesized a negative correlation between economic development and piracy rates.
 +
|FundamentalIssue=1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare, 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media),
 +
|EvidenceBasedPolicy=F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness),
 +
|Discipline=K4: Legal Procedure; the Legal System; and Illegal Behavior, K42: Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law, O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
 +
|Intervention-Response=The historical investigation of different authorship conceptions that reveal significant cultural differences in the contemporary copyright problem across long historical roots, these results hint that the debate in global IPRs may persist notwithstanding universalizing IP laws across different nations because cultural differences will persist. The findings from the present study raise several significant questions regarding how legal regimes should be conceptualized, how piracy itself is framed, and how policymakers might proceed to work with the communities of IP users and creators.
 +
|Description of Data=* The author examines both quantitative and qualitative research models used in
 +
this study to examine global IP protection, addresses some limitations of the empirical study and advocates historical approaches to the cultural problem in IP protection.
 +
 +
*In Hofestede’s work, the number of respondents across countries had a great degree of variance. For example, the number of respondents was fewer than 200 in 15 countries, whereas only 6 countries had respondents numbering 1,000.  Hofstede based his study on the factor analyses of an existing database of IBM employee attitude survey questionnaires which were related to personal work goals.
 +
 +
* The GLOBE survey was conducted with 951 organizations in three  industries: food processing, financial services, and telecommunications services. In addition, the development and analysis of the GLOBE questionnaire was theory-driven, based on the existing literature and on statistical pretests.
 +
|Data Year=1968-1972; 1994-1997
 +
|Data Type=Primary and Secondary data
 +
|Data Source=Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness; Review of Existing Academic and Industries Literature;
 +
|Method of Collection=Quantitative Collection Methods, Qualitative Collection Methods, Survey Research (qualitative; e.g. consumer preferences)
 +
|Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Qualitative Analysis Methods
 +
|Industry=Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing; Cultural education;
 +
|Country=China; England;
 +
|Cross-country=Yes
 +
|Comparative=Yes
 +
|Government or policy=No
 +
|Literature review=Yes
 +
}}
 +
|Dataset={{Dataset
 +
|Sample Size=53
 +
|Level of Aggregation=Country,
 +
|Data Material Year=1968-1972
 +
}}{{Dataset
 +
|Sample Size=1
 +
|Level of Aggregation=Company,
 +
|Data Material Year=1968-1972
 +
}}{{Dataset
 +
|Sample Size=58
 +
|Level of Aggregation=Country,
 +
|Data Material Year=1994-1997
 +
}}{{Dataset
 +
|Sample Size=951
 +
|Level of Aggregation=Organizations,
 +
|Data Material Year=1994-1997
 +
}}{{Dataset
 +
|Sample Size=2
 +
|Level of Aggregation=Research models,
 +
|Data Material Year=Not stated
 +
}}{{Dataset
 +
|Sample Size=2
 +
|Level of Aggregation=Country,
 +
|Data Material Year=Not stated
 +
}}
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 09:33, 18 November 2016

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Mun (2009)
Title: Culture-related aspects of intellectual property rights: A cross-cultural analysis of copyright
Author(s): Mun, S.-H.
Year: 2009
Citation: MUN, S.-H. 2009. Culture-related aspects of intellectual property rights: A cross-cultural analysis of copyright. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 69, 2925.
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description:
  • The author examines both quantitative and qualitative research models used in

this study to examine global IP protection, addresses some limitations of the empirical study and advocates historical approaches to the cultural problem in IP protection.

  • In Hofestede’s work, the number of respondents across countries had a great degree of variance. For example, the number of respondents was fewer than 200 in 15 countries, whereas only 6 countries had respondents numbering 1,000. Hofstede based his study on the factor analyses of an existing database of IBM employee attitude survey questionnaires which were related to personal work goals.
  • The GLOBE survey was conducted with 951 organizations in three industries: food processing, financial services, and telecommunications services. In addition, the development and analysis of the GLOBE questionnaire was theory-driven, based on the existing literature and on statistical pretests.
Data Type: Primary and Secondary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: Yes
Comparative Study?: Yes
Literature review?: Yes
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 1968-1972
  • 1994-1997
Funder(s):

Abstract

This study presented a critical investigation of the mainstream neo-liberal approach to global intellectual property rights protection. There is a widespread but incorrect perception in the contemporary intellectual property policy regime that ineffective copyright protection in developing countries is primarily an institutional problem deriving from the lack of economic capacity and jurisprudential systems. Arguing that the conventional policy regime offers only a limited account for global copyright protection, this study aimed to show that inadequate copyright protection is not only an institutional but also historically contingent cultural problem. For the purpose, the present study conducted two phases of investigation: (1) a cross- national data analysis of software piracy and (2) comparative historical analysis of authorship in England and China. The first study empirically examined the key determinants of software piracy in the contemporary international market. From multivariate statistical analyses of international data, the study attempted to identify significant factors facilitating software piracy. Special attention was paid to identifying the influence of national culture in software piracy when other institutional factors were controlled. The results showed that a combined outcome of multiple factors including national income, institutional capacity for property protection, in-group collectivist cultural practices, and attitudes toward international intellectual property protection explains the software piracy problem. The second study aimed to provide a more in-depth understanding of the historical linkage between copyright and culture. It traced the historical formation of authorship in English and Chinese print culture to examine whether and why there emerged contrasting conceptions of authorship between them. The findings showed that there was a distinctive historical divergence of material, ideological, and institutional contexts of print culture, which led to different authorship conceptions between England and China. This implies that authorship as the fundamental cultural basis of modern copyright law was not a natural and universal phenomenon inevitably arising from the printing press but rather historically and culturally contingent.

Main Results of the Study

  • The conventional policy research suggested that strong IP protection leads to the overall

economic development. Considering various theoretical and methodological drawbacks in the conventional model, a number of critical scholars challenged the mainstream IP policy argument. They argued that IP protection is not a precondition of the economic development but an outcome of various national contexts.

  • The level of IP protection responds to differences in the development of national economies: countries with high income

levels are likely to have stronger protection. The rationale for this assumption is straightforward: countries with a higher level of income are able to provide stronger protection of information products simply because they can afford legitimate products. Furthermore, since the legal enforcement involves large costs for judicial systems, policing and experts, depending on financial capacity, richer countries are expected to enforce the law better than poorer ones. For all these reasons, this study hypothesized a negative correlation between economic development and piracy rates.


Policy Implications as Stated By Author

The historical investigation of different authorship conceptions that reveal significant cultural differences in the contemporary copyright problem across long historical roots, these results hint that the debate in global IPRs may persist notwithstanding universalizing IP laws across different nations because cultural differences will persist. The findings from the present study raise several significant questions regarding how legal regimes should be conceptualized, how piracy itself is framed, and how policymakers might proceed to work with the communities of IP users and creators.


Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Green-tick.png
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Green-tick.png
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)
Green-tick.png

Datasets

Sample size: 53
Level of aggregation: Country
Period of material under study: 1968-1972


Sample size: 1
Level of aggregation: Company
Period of material under study: 1968-1972


Sample size: 58
Level of aggregation: Country
Period of material under study: 1994-1997


Sample size: 951
Level of aggregation: Organizations
Period of material under study: 1994-1997


Sample size: 2
Level of aggregation: Research models
Period of material under study: Not stated


Sample size: 2
Level of aggregation: Country
Period of material under study: Not stated