Grok & Korg: Intellectual Property

I know it’s not Thursday yet, but it’s time for a Throwback (Nousion style)!

We’ve just focused on a Collection dedicated to all things ADA. It was great fun, but I felt it would be more fun to go back and examine intellectual property.  Namely, my thoughts compared to those of Dan Ho and Sarah Frick.

In my own thoughts of Intellectual Property, I kept everything very vague and simplified.  In fact, I don’t even think I answered whether or not I considered it a friend or a foe because I identified it as being “situation-dependent.”  The main point of my argument was how the name was misleading and that it was important to examine the different types of IP to better understand different situations.

Sarah’s thoughts were very similar, where in some cases IP was good and in some cases it was bad.  She also examined some of the different types of IP. Her thoughts focused more when she expressed interest in IP in terms of Traditional Knowledge and Culture.  This interest later went on to inspire a fascinating interview with Dr. Alan Boraas.

Unlike Sarah and myself, Dan had a pretty solid stance defending Intellectual Property as form of protection, but also recognized the validity of differing opinions. Both Dan and I give hypothetical examples of IP.  Sarah and Dan both expressed interest in how IP related to culture, however, in hindsight both arguments were related but were talking about different aspects of culture (therefore it eludes an inherently right or wrong answer).

3 comments on “Grok & Korg: Intellectual Property

  1. I think it was hard for most of the students in the class to pick an IP side, I’m sure for a variety of reasons. I’m struggling to decide where I fall because I do not think my livelihood depends on what I am independently producing. I have an employment contract with UAF, which pays me to do my job to the best of my ability (mostly). I’ve felt ownership and pride in what I do however, I have never looked at anything I contribute to the university as “mine.” I’m not sure if I would feel differently as a faculty working on research or an artist or writer etc. If I leave UAF, I will probably still think the same way and will take my skills/talents elsewhere and possibly implement ideas that I used at UAF at my new job. It’s hard for me to think about this in terms of intellectual property. What do you think about your work at UAS-Sitka on in the context of a staff role at a university?

  2. I am with you Hailey, my feelings about IP are kind of ambiguous. However, I am pretty sure I would have a problem with somebody making money off of my idea. On the other hand, I feel like anything I put on the internet is fair game . . . kind of mixed feelings.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *