A Study of Ownership of Intellectual Property Rights under Open Innovation Paradigm: Based on the Inherent Characteristics of Typical Practices of User Innovation and Peer Innovation
Li Yongming, Xiang Ludan, Zhang Yining
Guanghua School of Law, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310008, China
Abstract：The closed innovation paradigm, which used to be the mainstream, has shaped the classic success cases such as DuPont and Bell LABS, enabling many innovative subjects who pursue this innovation model achieve great success. However, in recent years, the traditional closed innovation has gradually become unsustainable in the context of industry evolution and market changes, while open innovation is increasingly favored by various innovation subjects. While the pioneering open innovation practice has spawned the transformation of innovation paradigm, the popularity of open innovation is also negatively affecting the development of innovation practice. The typical practice represented by “user innovation” and “peer innovation” has entered the public’s vision in the field of innovation. Although the open innovation practice characterized by “individual creation” is still in its early stage, it has become more and more mature. The transformation of innovation mode poses new challenges to the original intellectual property regulation system, and the innovation behavior adjusted by the original intellectual property regulation system has undergone qualitative changes, which is doomed to its limited applicability to new scenarios and new situations. There are different forms of expression between closed innovation and open innovation in practice, and the original abstract and typed legal facts cannot accommodate the new situation, which makes the intellectual property regulation system constructed under the traditional closed innovation field inevitably produce the absence of legal facts in the face of the new practice mode of open innovation. The intellectual property interest balance mechanism based on the three conceptual tools of exclusive right, right restriction and public domain will inevitably produce imbalance under the innovation paradigm of open and sharing concept. The core of the intellectual property problems brought about by the two typical practices is the ownership of intellectual property rights, which leads to the preliminary problems and subsequent rights protection problems that can be summarized as: the qualitative doubt of individual behavior in open innovation, the process of identifying and confirming property rights, the difficulties of ownership of rights and the application of achievements, and the procedural and substantive law protection of intellectual property rights. The difference in legal facts between closed innovation and open innovation leads to the difference in the underlying logic of the application of rules, and the explanatory power of the classical explanation theory of the legitimacy of intellectual property behind the existing legal system of intellectual property is weakened in the transformation of innovation paradigm. It is decided that the intellectual property problems in the typical practice of open innovation cannot be solved simply by analogy with the existing legal system of intellectual property. Therefore, this paper holds that a kind of open innovation between formal norms and free space is suitable for the characteristics of open innovation. Unified intellectual property guidelines and norms can be used as the direction of countermeasures for the ownership of intellectual property rights in the typical practice of open innovation. This paper rejects the separate legislative ideas that will increase legislative costs and incompatibility of legal systems, and it does not agree with the academic argument of “knowledge sharing ethical system” to eliminate intellectual property rights to solve difficult problems in special scenarios. Compared with legal norms, the so-called intellectual property guidelines are more flexible and specialized, and more professional and secure than autonomous agreements such as community conventions. This paper tries to regard them as concretization of micro-policies, and advocates that the intellectual property guidelines should be designed and implemented by the intellectual property administrative department. In the long run, it is a forward-looking consideration of the overall evolution direction of the intellectual property legal system under the spirit of balance of interests, which is equivalent to a priori practice of the legal system. On the other hand, the intellectual property normative guidelines are the embodiment of the national macro policy of intellectual property, which can survive in the form of legal sources and have an impact on the application of law under certain conditions. In addition, the intellectual property guidelines can also be used as a blueprint to guide the orderly operation of the entire industry. On this basis, three basic concepts of the design of norms are further proposed: First, maximize the realization of the value of intellectual property transformation. Second, pay attention to the presentation of efficiency value. The third is to reshape the structure of intellectual property rights, and concretely realize the disassembly of intellectual property rights to meet the interests of different subjects.
李永明, 向璐丹, 章奕宁. 开放创新范式下知识产权权利归属问题研究——基于用户创新、同侪创新典型实践之内在特征[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2024, 54(2): 60-74.
Li Yongming, Xiang Ludan, Zhang Yining. A Study of Ownership of Intellectual Property Rights under Open Innovation Paradigm: Based on the Inherent Characteristics of Typical Practices of User Innovation and Peer Innovation. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2024, 54(2): 60-74.
2024, Vol. 54 
