Intellectual Property Rights and Well-Being: A Methodological Approach

Abstract

The dominant justification of intellectual property rights (IPR) holds that it is desirable in utilitarian terms for inventions and creations to be produced. In this context, utility is usually equated with economic wealth. However, this interpretation of utility is suspect for a number of reasons, as is widely recognized in other fields. The well-being approach to IPR proposes that utility should be construed directly in terms of human well-being, rather than using economic proxies. There are several rival theories of well-being. The authors propose a theory-neutral approach which builds on areas of common ground between the theories on the ‘markers’ of well-being: things which are either constitutive, productive, or indicative of well-being. This approach provides a principled rationale for a broadly based approach to the measurement of well-being, encompassing a range of different subjective and objective measures. The chapter identifies nine markers that seem consistent with the mainstream theories of well-being and discusses their specific implications for IPR. The well-being approach argues for a more cautious and nuanced evaluation of IPR than currently prevails. Encouraging invention or creation in a particular field may increase general well-being in some way. But if a creation or invention is likely to decrease well-being, that might be a point against it. Although the well-being approach acknowledges that utilitarian considerations are relevant, it makes no claim that these are the only relevant considerations. The approach has potential synergies with other ‘lenses’, including social justice and morality.