理论辩论在国家和国际专利保护演变中的作用:从法国大革命到1883年巴黎公约

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW
O. Bracha
{"title":"理论辩论在国家和国际专利保护演变中的作用:从法国大革命到1883年巴黎公约","authors":"O. Bracha","doi":"10.1080/2049677X.2023.2207374","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"freedom and intimacy (74–76). Walter SMelion describes a case inwhich zones of bodily privacy and domestic privacy correspond in his essay on the c 1600’s manuscript, ‘Vita S Joseph beatissimae Virginis sponsi’, which features images of the heart of Joseph and of the child Christ’s instruction in his parents’ home and workshop. The spiritual privacy of Joseph’s heart is, however, not a zone of hidden authenticity but a work in progress, crafted and improved by Christ, just as his parents’ home is also a semi-public workshop (334–35). The volume’s commitment to a comparative approach is fulfilled through its range of disciplinary approaches, but not through a global study of early modern privacy. The one essay that addresses the world beyond Europe helps to indicate how richly productive such a wider scope might be. Hang Lin’s study of published examination essays in seventeenth-century China articulates ‘private’ and ‘public’ in terms of the state’s monopoly on providing authoritative sample civil-service exam essays. This assertion of control over knowledge by the state was challenged, and eventually defeated, by private scholars, many of whom had failed these examinations. The increasing popularity of books of sample essays written by such private scholars sapped the state’s control of Confucian orthodoxy. This example, Lin argues, shows the transformation of ‘private’ into ‘public’ knowledge as private interests came to define public opinion more successfully than the state. This volume’s case studies of early modern privacy deserve attention from researchers interested in tracing the roots of the modern concept of privacy: in particular, from researchers interested in the European traditions that influenced the landmark 1890 formulation of privacy by Louis D Brandeis and Samuel D Warren in the Harvard Law Review (1). This volume is a valuable contribution to interdisciplinary work in the history of ideas and social history that should profoundly shape future studies of privacy.","PeriodicalId":53815,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Legal History","volume":"11 1","pages":"101 - 106"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of theoretical debate in the evolution of national and international patent protection: from the French Revolution to the Paris Convention of 1883\",\"authors\":\"O. Bracha\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2049677X.2023.2207374\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"freedom and intimacy (74–76). Walter SMelion describes a case inwhich zones of bodily privacy and domestic privacy correspond in his essay on the c 1600’s manuscript, ‘Vita S Joseph beatissimae Virginis sponsi’, which features images of the heart of Joseph and of the child Christ’s instruction in his parents’ home and workshop. The spiritual privacy of Joseph’s heart is, however, not a zone of hidden authenticity but a work in progress, crafted and improved by Christ, just as his parents’ home is also a semi-public workshop (334–35). The volume’s commitment to a comparative approach is fulfilled through its range of disciplinary approaches, but not through a global study of early modern privacy. The one essay that addresses the world beyond Europe helps to indicate how richly productive such a wider scope might be. Hang Lin’s study of published examination essays in seventeenth-century China articulates ‘private’ and ‘public’ in terms of the state’s monopoly on providing authoritative sample civil-service exam essays. This assertion of control over knowledge by the state was challenged, and eventually defeated, by private scholars, many of whom had failed these examinations. The increasing popularity of books of sample essays written by such private scholars sapped the state’s control of Confucian orthodoxy. This example, Lin argues, shows the transformation of ‘private’ into ‘public’ knowledge as private interests came to define public opinion more successfully than the state. This volume’s case studies of early modern privacy deserve attention from researchers interested in tracing the roots of the modern concept of privacy: in particular, from researchers interested in the European traditions that influenced the landmark 1890 formulation of privacy by Louis D Brandeis and Samuel D Warren in the Harvard Law Review (1). This volume is a valuable contribution to interdisciplinary work in the history of ideas and social history that should profoundly shape future studies of privacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comparative Legal History\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"101 - 106\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comparative Legal History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2049677X.2023.2207374\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Legal History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2049677X.2023.2207374","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自由和亲密(74-76)。Walter melion在他关于16世纪手稿的文章《Vita S Joseph beatissimae Virginis sponsi》中描述了一个身体隐私和家庭隐私相对应的案例,这篇文章描绘了约瑟夫的心脏和孩子基督在他父母的家里和工作室里的指示。然而,约瑟内心的属灵隐私不是一个隐藏的真实区域,而是一个正在进行的工作,由基督精心制作和改进,就像他父母的家也是一个半公开的工作室一样(334-35)。该卷通过其学科方法的范围来实现比较方法的承诺,但不是通过对早期现代隐私的全球研究。这篇论述欧洲以外世界的文章有助于表明,这样一个更广泛的范围可能是多么富有成效。林航对17世纪中国发表的考试论文的研究,从国家垄断提供权威的公务员考试论文样本的角度,阐明了“私人”和“公共”。这种由国家控制知识的主张受到了私人学者的挑战,并最终被击败,他们中的许多人都没有通过这些考试。这些私人学者撰写的随笔样书越来越受欢迎,削弱了国家对儒家正统思想的控制。林认为,这个例子表明,随着私人利益比国家更成功地定义了公众舆论,“私人”知识向“公共”知识的转变。本卷的早期现代隐私的案例研究值得关注的研究人员有兴趣追踪隐私的现代概念的根源:特别是,来自对欧洲传统感兴趣的研究人员,这些传统影响了路易斯·D·布兰代斯和塞缪尔·D·沃伦在哈佛法律评论(1)中具有里程碑意义的1890年隐私表述。这一卷是对思想史和社会史上跨学科工作的宝贵贡献,应该深刻地塑造未来的隐私研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The role of theoretical debate in the evolution of national and international patent protection: from the French Revolution to the Paris Convention of 1883
freedom and intimacy (74–76). Walter SMelion describes a case inwhich zones of bodily privacy and domestic privacy correspond in his essay on the c 1600’s manuscript, ‘Vita S Joseph beatissimae Virginis sponsi’, which features images of the heart of Joseph and of the child Christ’s instruction in his parents’ home and workshop. The spiritual privacy of Joseph’s heart is, however, not a zone of hidden authenticity but a work in progress, crafted and improved by Christ, just as his parents’ home is also a semi-public workshop (334–35). The volume’s commitment to a comparative approach is fulfilled through its range of disciplinary approaches, but not through a global study of early modern privacy. The one essay that addresses the world beyond Europe helps to indicate how richly productive such a wider scope might be. Hang Lin’s study of published examination essays in seventeenth-century China articulates ‘private’ and ‘public’ in terms of the state’s monopoly on providing authoritative sample civil-service exam essays. This assertion of control over knowledge by the state was challenged, and eventually defeated, by private scholars, many of whom had failed these examinations. The increasing popularity of books of sample essays written by such private scholars sapped the state’s control of Confucian orthodoxy. This example, Lin argues, shows the transformation of ‘private’ into ‘public’ knowledge as private interests came to define public opinion more successfully than the state. This volume’s case studies of early modern privacy deserve attention from researchers interested in tracing the roots of the modern concept of privacy: in particular, from researchers interested in the European traditions that influenced the landmark 1890 formulation of privacy by Louis D Brandeis and Samuel D Warren in the Harvard Law Review (1). This volume is a valuable contribution to interdisciplinary work in the history of ideas and social history that should profoundly shape future studies of privacy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Comparative Legal History is an international and comparative review of law and history. Articles will explore both ''internal'' legal history (doctrinal and disciplinary developments in the law) and ''external'' legal history (legal ideas and institutions in wider contexts). Rooted in the complexity of the various Western legal traditions worldwide, the journal will also investigate other laws and customs from around the globe. Comparisons may be either temporal or geographical and both legal and other law-like normative traditions will be considered. Scholarship on comparative and trans-national historiography, including trans-disciplinary approaches, is particularly welcome.
×
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