Intellectual Property Rights and Global Technological Debates

The concept of intellectual property rights in the present generation have already been a growing concern that even codes and laws are considered to be irrelevant as it is not able to encompass the requirements of the intellectual property rights issues that arise today because of the different advances in technology (“Intellectual Property,” n. d. ). It is not able to grasp the entire concept of information technology because of the difficulties that are associated with the openness and fluidity of information and this consequently results to the ease of exchanging information (“Intellectual Property,” n.d. ).

Historically, this particular term has its particular uses for the different worlds, in consideration of the characteristics of each category, that led to different implications for intellectual property rights and for its formation for the first, second, third, and fourth worlds (Chartrand, 1995). In addition to the exigent needs which the intellectual property rights seek to cover, Carey (2007) argues that it is relevant for the loss of income that is being protected by the legal statutes related to IPR.

It is within the belief that there should be safeguards for the use of information from which people could derive information from that these laws are formulated. The protections that the intellectual property rights provide is becoming more and more irrelevant for the present times as there is now the call for people to take into consideration the fact that the availability and free flow of information serves as a good factor for economic growth and that it should not be limited to only a few sectors of the society (Krummenacker, 2005).

Likewise, this term does not and should not exist in a world where it is seen that forms of software are free and nobody owns it (jondstahl, 2006). Likewise, with the goal of gaining access to the social services such as medicines, the opposition of IPR for this particular kind of right proves to be an irrelevant form of safeguard (Angell, 2004). References Angell, M. (2004). The truth about the drug companies. Retrieved November 28, 2008, from http://www. actions-traitements. org/spip. php? breve914. Carey, D. (2007). In defense of intellectual property. Retrieved November 28, 2008, from http://www. acton. org/commentary/commentary413.

php. Chartrand, H. (1995). Intellectual property in the global village. Retrieved November 28, 2008, from http://library2. usask. ca/gic/v1n4/chartrand/chartrand. html. Intellectual Property. (n. d. ). Retrieved November 28, 2008, from http://issues. takingitglobal. org/intprop? gclid=CMeaoomq6ZMCFRgNewod1gxUWA. johndstahl. (2006, November 21). Software and Community in the Early 21st Century [Video File]. Video posted to http://www. youtube. com/watch? v=NorfgQlEJv8. Krummenacker, M. (1995). Are “intellectual property rights” justified? Retrieved November 28, 2008, from http://www. n-a-n-o. com/ipr/extro2/extro2mk. html.