Intellectual property rights (IPRs) have become an area of international interest and controversy as the rate and cost of technological progress have increased, and as national borders have become ever more transparent. Disagreements have arisen not only over the mechanics of granting such rights, but even over the validity and merits of certain fundamental concepts concerning IPRs. For example, there are those who argue that the existence of robust IPR laws catalyzes innovation, and beneficially influences the economic future of companies and nations. Others argue that such laws are economically inefficient and exploitative, and that they are detrimental to the development of emerging nations.

IPRs are not a recent invention, and the word" right" may not be particularly well chosen. As Paul David notes in Chapter 2 of this volume, patents were used as early as the 14th century by English monarchs to protect the knowledge base of foreign craftsmen imported to enhance the state of the domestic technology. In those days, patents were granted initially for 14 years, which was the time necessary to graduate two generations of apprentices. The fact that rights to exploit advances in technical capability are granted by some governing authority, and are not considered inherent to the creator, is not generally appreciated. In the United States, for example, the government grants rights primarily to promote the public interest, and such rights are formulated so as to balance in some manner the economic benefits to the inventor and to society at large. Thus, it will be appreciated that the center of gravity of this balance may shift with changes in the state of the technology, the market, or social values (US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, 1992).