The Right to Innovate

A. Torrance, E. von Hippel
{"title":"The Right to Innovate","authors":"A. Torrance, E. von Hippel","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2339132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Individual citizens have been found to be a major source of new product and service innovations of value both to themselves and to the economy at large. These citizen innovators operate in a little understood legal environment that we call the innovation wetlands. We show via a review of fundamental rights guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution and elsewhere that individuals in the United States participating in the innovation wetlands possess strong legal protections with respect to both their freedom to innovate and their right to diffuse information about their innovations to others. However, we also show that legislation and regulation — often promulgated without awareness of consumer innovation as a valuable resource — can, in practice, significantly interfere with individuals’ exercise of their fundamental freedom to innovate. This interference can cost society dearly by discouraging and slowing innovation or even thwarting it entirely. Just as intellectual property may chill citizen user and open innovation by raising the costs of innovation, so may regulatory property rights agencies grant to incumbent market actors.We offer three approaches to protecting the valuable resource of innovation by individuals from excessive negative impacts caused by legislation and regulation. First, we propose enhancing general awareness of the issue by framing the concept of individual innovation rights as an “innovation wetlands” that must be protected from encroachment and despoilment. Second, we describe the legislative and regulatory frameworks and practices that demark today’s innovation wetlands, as experienced by individual and collaborating innovators. Third, we suggest improvements that can strengthen protection of the innovation wetlands, including heightening awareness of the issue in existing, mandated cost–benefit analyses that are already applied, although imperfectly, to regulation in the United States.","PeriodicalId":103805,"journal":{"name":"Innovation & Organizational Behavior eJournal","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovation & Organizational Behavior eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2339132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

Abstract

Individual citizens have been found to be a major source of new product and service innovations of value both to themselves and to the economy at large. These citizen innovators operate in a little understood legal environment that we call the innovation wetlands. We show via a review of fundamental rights guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution and elsewhere that individuals in the United States participating in the innovation wetlands possess strong legal protections with respect to both their freedom to innovate and their right to diffuse information about their innovations to others. However, we also show that legislation and regulation — often promulgated without awareness of consumer innovation as a valuable resource — can, in practice, significantly interfere with individuals’ exercise of their fundamental freedom to innovate. This interference can cost society dearly by discouraging and slowing innovation or even thwarting it entirely. Just as intellectual property may chill citizen user and open innovation by raising the costs of innovation, so may regulatory property rights agencies grant to incumbent market actors.We offer three approaches to protecting the valuable resource of innovation by individuals from excessive negative impacts caused by legislation and regulation. First, we propose enhancing general awareness of the issue by framing the concept of individual innovation rights as an “innovation wetlands” that must be protected from encroachment and despoilment. Second, we describe the legislative and regulatory frameworks and practices that demark today’s innovation wetlands, as experienced by individual and collaborating innovators. Third, we suggest improvements that can strengthen protection of the innovation wetlands, including heightening awareness of the issue in existing, mandated cost–benefit analyses that are already applied, although imperfectly, to regulation in the United States.
创新的权利
人们发现,公民个人是新产品和服务创新的主要来源,这些创新对他们自己和整个经济都有价值。这些公民创新者在一个鲜为人知的法律环境中运作,我们称之为创新湿地。我们通过对美国宪法和其他地方保障的基本权利的审查表明,参与创新湿地的美国个人在其创新自由和向他人传播其创新信息的权利方面享有强有力的法律保护。然而,我们也表明,立法和监管——往往在没有意识到消费者创新是一种宝贵资源的情况下颁布——在实践中可能会严重干扰个人行使其基本的创新自由。这种干预会阻碍和减缓创新,甚至完全阻碍创新,从而使社会付出高昂的代价。正如知识产权可能会通过提高创新成本而使公民用户和开放创新降温一样,监管产权机构也可能会向现有的市场参与者授予权力。我们提出了保护个人宝贵的创新资源免受立法和监管过度负面影响的三种方法。首先,我们建议通过将个人创新权利的概念构建为“创新湿地”来提高公众对这一问题的认识,必须保护其免受侵犯和掠夺。其次,我们描述了标志着当今创新湿地的立法和监管框架和实践,以及个人和合作创新者的经验。第三,我们提出了可以加强对创新湿地保护的改进建议,包括在现有的强制性成本效益分析中提高对这一问题的认识,这些分析已经应用于美国的监管,尽管不完美。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信