Abramowicz, Michael, “A New Uneasy Case for Copyright (Celebrating the Fourtieth Anniversary of Justice Breyer’s Article ‘The Uneasy Case for Copyright’)” (2011), 79 George Washington Law Review, 1644–1691.Google Scholar

Adeney, Elizabeth, The Moral Rights of Authors and Performers: An International and Comparative Analysis (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).Google Scholar

Ahrens, Hans Jürgen & McGuire, Mary-Rose, Model Law on Intellectual Property: A Proposal for German Law Reform (Munich: Sellier European Law Publishers and GRUR, 2013).Google Scholar

Alexander, Gregory S., “Comparing the Two Legal Realisms – American and Scandinavian” (2002), 50 American Journal of Comparative Law, 131–174.Google Scholar

Alexander, Gregory S., “The Social Obligation Norm in American Property Law” (2009), 94 Cornell Law Review, 745–819.Google Scholar

Alexander, Gregory S. & Peñalvin, Eduardo, An Introduction to Property Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012).Google Scholar

Aplin, Tanya, “Right to Property and Trade Secrets,” in Geiger, Christophe (ed.), Research Handbook on Human Rights and Intellectual Property (Cheltenham; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2015), pp. 421–437 (chap. 22).Google Scholar

Aplin, Tanya, “Confidential Information as Property,” King’s College London Dickson Poon School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2436983.Google Scholar

Aristotle, , Politics (trans. with commentaries by Apostle, Hippocrates G. & Gerson, Lloyd P, Grinell, IO: The Peripatetic Press, 1986).Google Scholar

Arrow, Kenneth, Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1962).Google Scholar

Bainbridge, David I., Intellectual Property (Harlow: Pearson, 9th edn., 2012).Google Scholar

Balganesh, Shyamkrishna, “Demystifying the Right to Exclude: Of Property, Inviolability and Automatic Injunctions” (2008), 31 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 593–661.Google Scholar

Balganesh, Shyamkrishna, “Foreseeability and Copyright Incentives” (2009), 122 Harvard Law Review, 1569–1633.Google Scholar

Balganesh, Shyamkrishna, “Quasi Property: Like, but Not Quite Property” (2012), 160 University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1889–1925.Google Scholar

Balganesh, Shyamkrishna, “Alienability and Copyright Law,” in Howe, Helena R. & Griffiths, Jonathan (eds.), Concepts of Property in Intellectual Property Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 161–182 (chap. 7).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Becker, Lawrence, “Deserving to Own Intellectual Property” (1993), 68 Chicago-Kent Law Review, 609–628.Google Scholar

Beiter, Klaus D., “The Right to Property and the Protection of Interests in Intellectual Property – A Human Rights Perspective on the European Court of Human Rights Decision in Anbeuser-Busch Inc. v. Portugal” (2008), 39 International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 714–721.Google Scholar

Beitz, Charles R., “The Moral Rights of Creators of Artistic and Literary Works” (2005), 13 Journal of Political Philosophy, 330–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bell, Tom W., “Indelicate Imbalancing in Intellectual Property in the Information Age,” in Thierer, Adam & Crews, Clyde W. Jr. (eds.), Copy Fights: The Future of Intellectual Property in the Information Age (Washington, DC: Cato, 2002), pp. 1–16 (chap. 1).Google Scholar

Bentham, Jeremy, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (Oxford: Clarendon Press, Reprint of the New Edition, 1879 (1st edn., 1789)).Google Scholar

Bently, Lionel, “Communication to Thing: Historical Aspects to the Conceptualisation of Trade Marks as Property” (2007), 7 University of Iowa Legal Studies Research Paper, 1–48.Google Scholar

Bently, Lionel, “Trade Secrets: Intellectual Property but Not Property?” in Howe, Helena R. & Griffiths, Jonathan (eds.), Concepts of Property in Intellectual Property Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 60–93 (chap. 3).Google Scholar

Bently, Lionel & Kretschmer, Martin (eds.), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450–1900), www.copyrighthistory.org.Google Scholar

Bessen, James & Meurer, Michael J., Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2008).Google Scholar

Bessen, James & Meurer, Michael J., “The Direct Costs from NPE Disputes” (2014), 99 Cornell Law Review, 387–424.Google Scholar

Birks, Peter, An Introduction to the Law of Restitution (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985).Google Scholar

Biron, Laura, “Public Reason and Intellectual Property,” in Lever, Annabelle (ed.), New Frontiers in Intellectual Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 225–260 (chap. 9).Google Scholar

Bjarup, Jes, “The Philosophy of Scandinavian Realism” (2005), 18 Ratio Juris, 1–15.Google Scholar

Blackstone, William, Commentaries of the Law of England, Book 2: The Rights of Things (Oxford 1766; e-book reprint).Google Scholar

Bohannan, Christina, “Copyright Harm, Foreseeability and Fair Use” (2007), 85 Washington University Law Review, 969–1003.Google Scholar

Boie, Bertram, “The Protection of Intellectual Property Rights through Bilateral Investment Treaties: Is There a TRIPS-plus Dimension?” (2010), 4 NCCR Trade Regulation Working Papers.Google Scholar

Bonadio, Enrico, “Bans and Restrictions on the Use of Trade Marks and Consumers’ Health” (2014), 4 Intellectual Property Quarterly, 326–345.Google Scholar

Bouckaert, Boudewijn, “What Is Property?” (1990), 13 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 775–816.Google Scholar

Bracha, Oren, “The Ideology of Authorship Revisited: Authors, Markets, and Liberal Values in Early American Copyright” (2008), 118 Yale Law Journal, 186–271.Google Scholar

Bracha, Oren& Syed, Talha, “Beyond Efficiency: Consequence-sensitive Theories of Copyright” (2014), 29 Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 230–315.Google Scholar

Breakey, Hugh, “Properties of Copyright: Exclusion, Exclusivity, Non-interference and Authority,” in Howe, Helena R. & Griffiths, Jonathan (eds.), Concepts of Property in Intellectual Property Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 137–160 (chap, 6).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Breyer, Stephen, “The Uneasy Case for Copyright: A Study of Copyright in Books, Photocopies, and Computer Programs” (1970), 84 Harvard Law Review, 281–351.Google Scholar

Buckland, W. W., A Manual of Roman Private Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1947).Google Scholar

Burk, Dan, “Law and Economics of Intellectual Property: In Search of First Principles” (2012), 8 Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 397–414.Google Scholar

Burk, Dan & Lemley, Mark A., “Quantum Patent Mechanics” (2005), 9 Lewis and Clark Law Review, 29–56.Google Scholar

Calabresi, Guido & Melamed, A. Douglas, “Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral” (1972), 86 Harvard Law Review, 1089–1128.Google Scholar

Calboli, Irene (ed.), Research Handbook on Intellectual Property Exhaustion and Parallel Imports (Cheltenham, Glouchester: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016).Google Scholar

Carrier, Michael A., “Cabining Intellectual Property through a Property Paradigm” (2004), 54 Duke Law Journal, 1–145.Google Scholar

Carter, Mark R., “Copyright’s Hand Abstractions Test for Patent’s Section 101 Subject-matter Eligibility” (2014), 30 Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal, 497–525.Google Scholar

Carter, Stephen L., “Does It Matter Whether Intellectual Property Is Property?” (1993), 68 Chicago-Kent Law Review, 715–723.Google Scholar

Chiang, Tun-Jen, “The Levels of Abstraction Problem in Patent Law” (2011), 105 Northwestern University Law Review, 1097–1152.Google Scholar

Chiang, Yun-Chen & Smith, Henry E., “An Economic Analysis of Civil versus Common Law Property” (2012), 88 Notre Dame Law Review, 1–55.Google Scholar

Coase, Ronald, “The Problem of Social Cost” (1960), 3 The Journal of Law and Economics, 1–44.Google Scholar

Çoban, Ali Riza, Protection of Property Rights within the European Convention of Human Rights (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004).Google Scholar

Cohen, Felix S., “Dialogue on Private Property” (1954), 9 Rutgers Law Review, 357–387).Google Scholar

Coleman, Jules, “Efficiency, Exchange, and Auction: Philosophic Aspects of the Economic Approach to Law” (1980), 68 California Law Review, 221–249.Google Scholar

Correa, Carlos & Viñuales, Jorge, “Intellectual Property Rights as Protected Investments: How Open Are the Gates?” (2016), 19 Journal of Economic Law, 91–120.Google Scholar

Cotter, Thomas F., “Do Federal Uses of Intellectual Property Implicate the Fifth Amendment?” (1998), 50 Florida Law Review, 529–572.Google Scholar

Dagan, Hanoch, “Inside Property” (2013), 63 University of Toronto Law Journal, 1–21.Google Scholar

Davison, Mark, “Plain Packaging of Tobacco and the ‘Right’ to Use a Trademark” (2012), 34 European Intellectual Property Review, 498–501.Google Scholar

Davison, Mark, “The Legitimacy of Plain Packaging under International Intellectual Property Law: Why There Is No Right to Use a Trademark under either the Paris Convention or the TRIPS Agreement” (2012), in Voon, et al., Public Health and Plain Packaging of Cigarettes, 81–108.Google Scholar

Davison, Mark & , Patrick Emerton, “Rights, Privileges, Legitimate Interests, and Justifiability: Article 20 of TRIPs and Plain Packaging of Tobacco” (2014), 29 American University International Law Review, 505–580.Google Scholar

de Werra, Jacques (ed.), Research Handbook on Intellectual Property Licensing (Norhampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2013).Google Scholar

de Werra, Jacques, “Can Exclusive Licensees Sue for Infringement of Licensed IP rights? a Case Study Confirming the Need to Create Global IP Licensing Rules” (2016), 30 Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 189–209.Google Scholar

de Werra, Jacques, “International IP Licensing Transactions: Time to Adopt Global Rules for the Right of Exclusive Licensees to Sue for Infringement of the Licensed IP Rights?” (2017), 48 International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 251–253.Google Scholar

Demsetz, Harold, “Toward a Theory of Property Rights” (1967), 57 The American Economic Review, 347–359.Google Scholar

Demsetz, Harold, “The Private Production of Public Goods” (1970), 13 The Journal of Law and Economics, 293–306.Google Scholar

Derclaye, Estelle & Turner, Tim, “Happy IP: Replacing the Law and Economics Justification for Intellectual Property Rights with a Well-being Approach” (2015), 37 European Intellectual Property Review 197–209.Google Scholar

Dietz, Adolf, “Legal Principles of Moral Rights,” in Le droit moral de l’auteur – The Moral Right of the Author (Civil Law): General Report (Paris: ALAI, 1993), pp. 54–80.Google Scholar

Dill, Jesse, “Possessing Trademarks: Can Blackstone or Locke Apply to Fast Food, Grocery Stores, and Virtual Sex Toys?” (2010), 14 Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review, 371–392.Google Scholar

Dinwoodie, Graeme (ed.), Methods and Perspectives in Intellectual Property (Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, ATRIP series, 2013) .Google Scholar

Dinwoodie, Graeme& Dreyfuss, Rochelle, “Designing a Global Intellectual Property System Responsive to Change: WIPO, WTO and Beyond” (2009), 46 Houston Law Review, 1187–1234.Google Scholar

Dogan, Stacey L. & Lemley, Mark A., “Trademarks and Consumer Search Costs on the Internet” (2004), 41 Houston Law Review, 777–838.Google Scholar

Dolin, Gregory & Manta, Irina D., “Taking Patents” (2016), 73 Washington and Lee Law Review, 719–796.Google Scholar

Donnelly, Jack, “Human Rights as Natural Rights” (1982), 4 Human Rights Quarterly, 391–405.Google Scholar

Donnelly, Jack, “The Relative Universality of Human Rights” (2007), 29 Human Rights Quarterly, 281–306.Google Scholar

Drahos, Peter, A Philosophy of Intellectual Property (Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1996)Google Scholar

Drahos, Peter, “Bits and Bips: Bilateralism in Intellectual Property” (2001), 4 Journal of World Intellectual Property, 791–808.Google Scholar

Drassinower, Abraham, “From Distribution to Dialogue: Remarks on the Concept of Balance in Copyright Law” (2009), 34 Journal of Corporation Law, 991–1007.Google Scholar

Drassinower, Abraham, “Copyright Infringement as Compelled Speech,” in Lever, Anabelle (ed.), New Frontiers in the Philosophy of Intellectual Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 203–224 (chap. 8).Google Scholar

Drassinower, Abraham, What’s Wrong with Copying? (Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press, 2015).Google Scholar

Dreier, Thomas, “Primär- und Folgtemärkte, in Schricker, Gerhard, Dreier, Thomas & Kur, Annette (eds.), Geistiges Eigentum im Dienste der Innovation (Baden Baden: Nomos, 2001), 51–81.Google Scholar

Dreier, Thomas, “How Much ‘Property’ Is There in Intellectual Property? The German Civil Law Perspective” (2013), in Howe, & Griffiths, , Concepts of Property in Intellectual Property Law, pp. 116–136 (chap. 5).Google Scholar

Dreier, Thomas & Ganzhorn, Marco, “Intellectual Property in Decisions of National Constitutional Courts in Europe” (2015), in Geiger, , Research Handbook on Human Rights and Intellectual Property, pp. 219–235 (chap. 12).Google Scholar

Dreyfuss, Rochelle & Franklin, Susy, “From Incentive to Commodity to Asset: How International Law Is Reconceptualizing Intellectual Property” (2015), 36 Michigan Journal of International Law, 557–602.Google Scholar

Duffy, John F., “Intellectual Property Isolationism and the Average Cost Thesis” (2005), 83 Texas Law Review, 1077–1095.Google Scholar

Durham, Alan L., “Copyright and Information Theory: Toward an Alternative Model of Authorship,” (2004), Brigham Young University Law Review, 69–125.Google Scholar

Dusollier, Severine, “Realigning Economic Rights with Exploitation of Works: the Control of Authors on the Circulation of Works in the Public Sphere” (2018), in Hugenholtz, (ed.), Copyright Reconstructed – Rethinking Copyright’s Economic Rights in a Time of Highly Dynamic Technological and Economic Change.Google Scholar

Easterbrook, Frank, “Intellectual Property Is Still Property” (1990), 13 Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 108–118.Google Scholar

Efroni, Zohar, Access-Right: The Future of Digital Copyright Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).Google Scholar

Elkin-Koren, Niva, “Cyberlaw and Social Change: A Democratic Approach to Copyright in Cyberspace” (1996), 14 Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal, 215–296.Google Scholar

Elkin-Koren, Niva & Salzberger, Eli M., The Law and Economics of Intellectual Property in the Digital Age (London; New York: Routledge, 2013).Google Scholar

Ellis, Douglas, Jarosz, John, Chapman, Michael, & Scott Oliver, L., “The Economic Implications (and Uncertainties) of Obtaining Permanent Injunctive Relief after eBay v. MercExchange” (2008), 17 The Federal Circuit Bar Journal, 437–471.Google Scholar

Epstein, Richard A., Takings: Private Property and the Public Domain (Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press, 1985).Google Scholar

Epstein, Richard A., “Why Restrict Alienation?” (1985) 85 Columbia Law Review, 970–990.Google Scholar

Epstein, Richard A., “The Constitutional Protection of Trade Secrets under the Takings Clause” (2004), 71 University of Chicago Law Review, 57–74.Google Scholar

Epstein, Richard A., “Liberty versus Property? Cracks in the Foundations of Copyright Law” (2005), 42 San Diego Law Review, 1–28.Google Scholar

Epstein, Richard A., “The Property Rights Movement and Intellectual Property: A Response to Peter Menell” (2007–08), 30 Regulation, 58–63.Google Scholar

Epstein, Richard A., “The Disintegration of Intellectual Property? A Classical Liberal Response to a Premature Obituary” (2010), 62 Stanford Law Review, 455–521.Google Scholar

Epstein, Richard A., “What Is So Special about Intangible Property? The Case for Intelligent Carryovers,” in Manne, Geoffrey A. & Wright, Joshua D. (eds.), Competition Policy and Patent Law under Uncertainty. Regulating Innovation (Cambridge: Cambridge Unitversity Press, 2011).Google Scholar

Fennell, Lee Anne, “Adjusting Alienability” (2009), 122 Harvard Law Review, 1403–1466.Google Scholar

Ficsor, Mihaly, The Law of Copyright and the Internet: The 1996 WIPO Treaties, Their Interpretation and Implementation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002).Google Scholar

Fisher, William, “Theories of Intellectual Property” (2001), in Munzer, , New Essays in the Legal and Political Theory of Property, pp. 168–199.Google Scholar

Friedmann, David D., Landes, William A., & Posner, Richard A., “Some Economics of Trade Secrets Law” (1991), 5 The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 61–72.Google Scholar

Fromer, Jeanne C. “An Information Theory of Copyright Law” (2014), 64 Emory Law Journal, 71–128.Google Scholar

Gauksdottir, Gudrun, The Right to Property and the European Convention on Human Rights : a Nordic Approach (Lund: Lunds Universitet, 2004).Google Scholar

Geiger, Christophe, “Constitutionalising Intellectual Property Law? The Influence of Fundamental Rights on Intellectual Property in the European Union” (2006), 37 International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 371–406.Google Scholar

Geiger, Christophe, “Intellectual Property Shall Be Protected!? Article 17(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: A Mysterious Provision with an Unclear Scope” (2009), 31 European Intellectual Property Review, 113–117.Google Scholar

Geiger, Christophe(ed.), Research Handbook on Human Rights and Intellectual Property (Cheltenham; Northampton, MA: Edvard Elgar Publishing, 2015).Google Scholar

Geiger, Christophe, “Implementing Intellectual Property Provisions in Human Rights Instruments: Towards a New Social Contract for the Protection of Intangibles” (2015), in Geiger, (ed.), Research Handbook on Human Rights and IP, pp. 661–689 (chap. 35).Google Scholar

Geiger, Christophe & Izyumenko, Elena, “Copyright on the Human Rights’ Trial: Redefining the Boundaries of Exclusivity through Freedom of Expression” (2014), 45 International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 316–342.Google Scholar

Geller, Paul E., “Beyond the Copyright Crisis: Principles for Change” (2008), 55 Journal of the Copyright Society USA, 165–199.Google Scholar

Gervais, Daniel J., “Towards a New Core International Copyright Norm: The Reverse Three-Step Test” (2005), 9 Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review, 1–35.Google Scholar

Gervais, Daniel J., “Analysis of the Compatibility of Certain Tobacco Product Packaging Rules with the TRIPS Agreement and the Paris Convention,” Report Prepared for Japan Tobacco International, November 30, 2010.Google Scholar

Gervais, Daniel J., “Plain Packaging and the TRIPS Agreement: A Response to Professors Davison, Mitchell and Voon” (2013), 23 Australian Intellectual Law Journal, 96–110.Google Scholar

Gervais, Daniel J., “Human Rights and the Philosophical Foundations of Intellectual Property” (2015), in Geiger, , Research Handbook on Human Rights and Intellectual Property, pp. 89–97.Google Scholar

Ghosh, Shubha, “Toward a Theory of Regulatory Takings for Intellectual Property: The Path Left Open after College Savings v. Florida Prepaid” (2000), 37 San Diego Law Review, 637–709.Google Scholar

Gibson, Christopher, “A Look at the Compulsory License in Investment Arbitration: The Case of Indirect Expropriation” (2010), 25 American University International Law Review, 357–422.Google Scholar

Ginsburg, Jane C., “A Tale of Two Copyrights: Literary Property in Revolutionary France and America” (1990), 64 Tulane Law Review, 991–1031.Google Scholar

Ginsburg, Jane C., “Proto-property in Literary and Artistic Works: Sixteenth Century Papal Printing Privileges,” in Alexander, Isabella & Tomás Gómez-Arrostegui, H. (eds.), History of Copyright Law (Cheltenham; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016).Google Scholar

Glendon, Mary Ann, A World Made New: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (New York: Random House, 2001).Google Scholar

Goldhammer, Michael, Geistiges Eigentum und Eigentumstheorie (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012).Google Scholar

Goldstein, Paul & Bernt Hugenholtz, P., International Copyright: Principles, Law, and Practice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013).Google Scholar

Gordon, Wendy J. “An Inquiry into the Merits of Copyright: The Challenges of Consistency, Consent, and Encouragement Theory” (1989), 41 Stanford Law Review, 1343–1469.Google Scholar

Gordon, Wendy J. “A Property Right in Self Expression – Equality and Individualism in the Natural Law of Intellectual Property (1993), 102 Yale Law Journal, 1533–1609.Google Scholar

Gordon, Wendy J. “Authors, Publishers, and Public Goods: Trading Gold for Dross” (2002), 36 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 159–198.Google Scholar

Gordon, Wendy J. “Harmless Use: Gleaning from Fields of Copyrighted Works” (2009), 77 Fordham Law Review, 2411–2435.Google Scholar

Grant, Robin F., “Judge Richard Posner’s Wealth Maximization Principle: Another Form of Utilitarianism?” (1989), 10 Cardozo Law Review, 815–845.Google Scholar

Griffiths, Andrew, An Economic Perspective on Trade Mark Law (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2011).Google Scholar

Griffiths, Jonathan, “Constitutionalising or Harmonising? The Court of Justice, the Right to Property and European Copyright Law” (2013), 38 European Law Review, 65–78.Google Scholar

Griffiths, Jonathan, “‘On the Back of a Cigarette Packet’: Standardised Packaging Legislation and the Tobacco Industry’s Fundamental Right to (Intellectual) Property” (2015), 4 Intellectual Property Quarterly, 343–369.Google Scholar

Griffiths, Jonathan & Mc Donagh, Luke, “Fundamental Rights and European IP Law – the Case of Art 17(2) of the EU Charter,” in Geiger, Christophe (ed.), Constructing European Intellectual Property Achievements and New Perspectives (Cheltenham; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2013), pp. 75–93.Google Scholar

Hadfield, Gillian K., “The Economics of Copyright: An Historical Perspective” (1991), 38 Copyright Law Symposium (ASCAP), 1–46.Google Scholar

Hale, Robert L., “Bargaining, Duress and Economic Liberty” (1943), 43 Columbia Law Review, 603–628.Google Scholar

Hardin, Garrett, “The Tragedy of the Commons” (1968), 162 Science, 1243–1248.Google Scholar

Harris, James W., Property and Justice (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996).Google Scholar

Harris, James W., “The Elusiveness of Property” (2005), 48 Scandinavian Studies of Law, 123–131.Google Scholar

Haugen, Hans Morten, “General Comment No. 17 on ‘Authors’ Rights’” (2007), 10 Journal of World Intellectual Property, 53–69.Google Scholar

Heald, Paul J. & Wells, Michael L., “Remedies for the Misappropriation of Intellectual Property by State and Municipal Governments before and after Seminole Tribe: The Eleventh Amendment and Other Immunity Doctrines” (1998), 55 Washington and Lee Law Review, 849–914.Google Scholar

Hegel, Georg W. F., Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, oder, Naturrecht und Staatswissenschaft im Grundrisse (Gans, Eduard, ed., Berlin: Humbolt und Duncker, 1854).Google Scholar

Hegel, Georg W. F., Philosophy of right (1821), reprinted in Knox, T. M. (ed. and trans.), Hegel’s Philosopy of Rights (London; Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1967 (paperback)).Google Scholar

Helfer, Laurence R., “Regime Shifting: The TRIPs Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking” (2004), 29 Yale Journal of International Law, 1–83.Google Scholar

Helfer, Laurence R., “Toward a Human Rights Framework for Intellectual Property” (2007), 40 U.C Davis Law Review, 971–1020.Google Scholar

Helfer, Laurence R., “The New Innovation Frontier? Intellectual Property and the European Court of Human Rights” (2008), 49 Harvard International Law Journal, 1–52.Google Scholar

Helfer, Laurence R. & Austin, Graeme W., Human Rights and Intellectual Property: Mapping the Global Interface (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011).Google Scholar

Heller, Michael A., “The Tragedy of the Anticommons: Property in the Transition from Marx to Markets” (1998), 111 Harvard Law Review, 621–688.Google Scholar

Heller, Michael A., “The Boundaries of Private Property” (1999), 108 Yale Law Journal, 1163–1223.Google Scholar

Hilty, Reto, Köklu, Kaya, & Hafenbrädl, Fabian, “Software Agreements: Stocktaking and Outlook – Lessons from the UsedSoft v. Oracle Case from a Comparative Law Perspective” (2013), 44 International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 263–292.Google Scholar

Hohfeld, Wesley N., “Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning (1913), 23 Yale Law Journal 16–59.Google Scholar

Hohfeld, Wesley N., “Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Legal Reasoning” (1917), 26 Yale Law Journal, 710–770.Google Scholar

Honoré, A. M., “Ownership,” in Guest, A. G. (ed.), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence: First Series (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961), pp. 107–147.Google Scholar

Howe, Helena R. & Griffiths, Jonathan (eds.), Concepts of Property in Intellectual Property Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013).Google Scholar

Howse, Rob, “Eli Lilly v Canada: A Pyrrhic Victory against Big Pharma,” International Economic Law and Policy Blog (March 26, 2017).Google Scholar

Hrdy, Camilla & Picozzi, Ben, “The AIA Is Not a Taking: A Response to Dolin & Manta” (2016), 72 Washington and Lee Law Review Online, 472–486.Google Scholar

Hugenholtz, P. Bernt (ed.), Copyright Reconstructed – Rethinking Copyright’s Economic Rights in a Time of Highly Dynamic Technological and Economic Change (Deventer: Kluwer, 2018).Google Scholar

Hughes, Justin, “The Philosophy of Intellectual Property” (1988), 77 Georgetown Law Journal, 287–366.Google Scholar

Hughes, Justin, “Copyright and Incomplete Historiographies: Of Piracy, Propertization, and Thomas Jefferson” (2006), 79 Southern California Law Review, 993–1084.Google Scholar

Hughes, Justin, “A Short History of ‘Intellectual Property’ in Relation to Copyright” (2012), 33 Cardozo Law Review, 1293–1340.Google Scholar

Hughes, Justin& Merges, Robert P., “Copyright and Distributive Justice” (2016), 92 Notre Dame Law Review, 513–577.Google Scholar

Hull, Gordon, “Clearing the Rubbish: Locke, the Waste Provision and the Moral Justification of Intellectual Property” (2009), 23 Public Affairs Quarterly, 67–93.Google Scholar

Hurt, Robert M. & Schuchman, Robert M., “The Economic Rationale of Copyright” (1966), 56 The American Economic Review 421–432.Google Scholar

Husovec, Martin, “Injunctions against Innocent Third Parties: The Case of Website Blocking” (2013), 4 Journal of Intellectual Property, Information, Technology and E-Commerce Law (JIPITEC), 116–129.Google Scholar

Husovec, MartinAccountable, Not Liable: Injunctions against Intermediaries (PhD Dissertation, 2015).Google Scholar

Husovec, Martin, “Intellectual Property Rights and Integration by Conflict: The Past, Present and Future” (2016), 18 Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 239–269.Google Scholar

Isaacs, Davida, “Not All Property Is Created Equal: Why Modern Courts Resist Applying the Takings Clause to Patents and Why They Are Right to Do So” (2007), 15 George Mason Law Review, 1–43.Google Scholar

Issacharoff, Samuel, “Can There Be a Behavioral Law and Economics?” (1998), 51 Vanderbilt Law Review, 1729–1745.Google Scholar

Jänich, Volker, Geistiges Eigentum – eine Komplementärerscheinung zum Sacheigentum? (66 Jus Privatum, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002).Google Scholar

Johnson, Phillip, “Trade Marks without a Brand: The Proposals on ‘Plain Packaging’ of Tobacco Products” (2012), 34 Intellectual Property Review, 461–470.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel, Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre. Metaphysik der Sitten Erster Teil, neuherausgegeben von Bernd Ludwig (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1986).Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel, “The Metaphysics of Morals,” reprinted in Gregor, Mary J. (trans. and ed.), The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant. Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).Google Scholar

Kaplow, Louis & Shavell, Steven, “Fairness versus Welfare” (2001), 114 Harvard Law Review, 961–1388.Google Scholar

Karnell, Gunnar, “Upphovsrättens verksbegrepp” (1968), 81 Tidsskrift for rettsvitenskap, 401–444.Google Scholar

Karnell, Gunnar, “Copyright to Sequels – With Special Regard to Television Show Formats” (2000), 31 International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 886–913.Google Scholar

Katz, Larissa, “Exclusion and Exclusivity in Property Law” (2008), 58 University of Toronto Law Review, 275–315.Google Scholar

Kitch, Edmund W., “Graham v. John Deere Co.: New Standards for Patents,” 1966 The Supreme Court Review, 293–346.Google Scholar

Kitch, Edmund W., “The Nature and the Function of the Patent System” (1977), 20 Journal of Law and Economics, 265–290.Google Scholar

Kohler, Josef, Urheberrecht an Schriftwerken und Verlagsrecht (Stuttgart: Verlag von Ferdinand Enke, 1907, new ed. Scienta Verlag Aalen, 1980).Google Scholar

Koktvedgaard, Mogens, Konkurrenceprægede immaterialretspositioner : bidrag til læren om de lovbestemte enerettigheder og deres forhold til den almene konkurrenceret (Copenhagen: Juristforbundets forlag, 1965).Google Scholar

Krauspenhaar, Daniel, Liability Rules in Patent Law: A Legal and Economic Analysis (Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, 2015).Google Scholar

Krier, James E. “Essay Evolutionary Theory and the Origin of Property Rights” (2009), 95 Cornell Law Review, 139–159.Google Scholar

Kur, Annette, “The Right to Use One’s Own Trade Mark: A Self-evident Issue or a New Concept in German, European, and International Trade Mark Law?” (1996), 18 European Intellectual Property Review, 198–203.Google Scholar

Lametti, David, “The Concept of Property: Relations through Objects of Social Wealth,” (2003) 53 University of Toronto Law Journal, 325–378.Google Scholar

Landes, William M. & Posner, Richard A., “Trademark Law: An Economic Perspective” (1987), 30 The Journal of Law and Economics, 265–309.Google Scholar

Landes, William M. & Posner, Richard A., “An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law” (1989), 18 Journal of Legal Studies, 325–363.Google Scholar

Landes, William M. & Posner, Richard A., “Indefinitely Renewable Copyright” (2003), 70 University of Chicago Law Review, 471–518.Google Scholar

Landes, William M. & Posner, Richard A., The Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Rights (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003).Google Scholar

Lemley, Mark A., “Romantic Authorship and the Rhetoric of Property” (1997), 75 Texas Law Review, 873–906.Google Scholar

Lemley, Mark A., “Ex Ante versus Ex Post Justifications for Intellectual Property” (2004), 71 University of Chicago Law Review, 129–150.Google Scholar

Lemley, Mark A., “Property, Intellectual Property and Free Riding” (2005), 83 Texas Law Review, 1031–1075.Google Scholar

Lemley, Mark A., “Faith-based Intellectual Property” (2015), 62 UCLA Law Review, 1328–1346.Google Scholar

Lemley, Mark A. & Melamed, A. Douglas, “Missing the Forest for the Trolls,” 113 Columbia Law Review (2013), 2117–2189.Google Scholar

Lessig, Lawrence, Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity (New York: Penguin Press, 2004).Google Scholar

Liberti, Lahra, “Intellectual Property Rights in International Investment Agreements: An Overview,” OECD Working Papers on International Investment (OECD, 201/01), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kmfq1njzl35-en.Google Scholar

Lipton, Jacqueline, “Information Property: Rights and Responsibility” (2004), 56 Florida Law Review, 135–194.Google Scholar

Litman, Jessica, Digital Copyright: Protecting Intellectual Property on the Internet (Amhurst, NY: Promotheus, 2001) .Google Scholar

Litman, Jessica, “Real Copyright Reform” (2010), 96 Iowa Law Review, 1–55.Google Scholar

Litman, Jessica, “Treaty Interpretation by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Expansionism at the Service of the Unity of International Law” (2010), 21 European Journal of International Law, 585–604.Google Scholar

Locke, John, Two Treaties of Government (1689, e-book reprint).Google Scholar

Long, Clarissa, “Information Costs in Patent and Copyright” (2004), 90 Virginia Law Review, 465–549.Google Scholar

Long, Pamela O., “Invention, Authorship, Intellectual Property and the Origin of Patents – Notes toward a Conceptual History” (1991), 32 Technology of Culture, 846–884.Google Scholar

López Escarcena, Sebastián, Indirect Expropriation in International Law (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2014).Google Scholar

Macaulay, Thomas Babington, Speeches on Politics and Literature (London: J. M. Dent & Co.; New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., 1909).Google Scholar

Madison, Michael, “The End of the Work as We Know It” (2012), 19 Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 325–355.Google Scholar

Marlan, Dustin, “Trademark Takings: Trademarks as Constitutional Property under the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause” (2013), 15 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, 1581–1629.Google Scholar

Martinson, Claes, “Sakrätt avseende annat än ägendom,” in Lambertz, Göran, Lindskog, Stefan & Möller, Mikael (eds.), Festskrift till Torgny Håstad (Uppsala: Iustus, 2011), 529–569.Google Scholar

Mattei, Ugo, Basic Principles of Property Law: A Comparative Legal and Economic Analysis (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000).Google Scholar

McCormack, Gerard, “American Private Law Writ Large? The UNICTRAL Secured Transactions Guide” (2011), 60 International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 597–625.Google Scholar

McDonough, James III, “The Myth of the ‘Patent Trolls’: An Alternative View of the Function of Patent Dealers in an Idea Economy” (2006), 56 Emory Law Journal, 189–228.Google Scholar

McGowan, David, “Copyright Nonconsequentialism” (2004), 69 Missouri Law Review 1–72.Google Scholar

Mendis, Dinishua & Kretschmer, Martin, The Treatment of Parodies under Copyright Law in Seven Jurisdictions. A Comparative Review of the Underlying Principles (Newport: The Intellectual Property Law Office (vol. 23, 2013)).Google Scholar

Menell, Peter S., “Bankruptcy Treatment of Intellectual Property Assets: An Economic Analysis” (2007), 22 Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 733–823.Google Scholar

Menell, Peter S., “The Property Rights Movement’s Embrace of Intellectual Property: True Love or Doomed Relationship?” (2007), 34 Ecology Law Quarterly, 713–754.Google Scholar

Menell, Peter S., “Intellectual Property and the Property Rights Movement: Should Intellectual Property Be Accorded the Same Protections as Tangible Forms of Property?”(2007–08), 30 Regulation, 36–42.Google Scholar

Menell, Peter S., “Governance of Intellectual Resources and Disintegration of Intellectual Property in the Digital Age” (2011), 26 Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 1523–1559.Google Scholar

Mercurio, Bryan, “Awakening the Sleeping Giant: Intellectual Property Rights in International Investment Agreements” (2012), 15 Journal of Economic Law, 871–915.Google Scholar

Merges, Robert P., “Of Property Rules, Coase and Intellectual Property” (1994), 94 Columbia Law Review, 2655–2673.Google Scholar

Merges, Robert P., Justifying Intellectual Property (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011).Google Scholar

Merges, Robert P., “What Kind of Rights Are Intellectual Property Rights?” (Dreyfuss, Rochelle & Pila, Justine (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017).Google Scholar

Merrill, Thomas & Smith, Henry E., “What Happened to Property in Law and Economics?” (2001), 111 Yale Law Journal, 357–398.Google Scholar

Merrill, Thomas & Smith, Henry E., The Oxford Introduction to U.S. Law: Property (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).Google Scholar

Miller, Joshua I. (2010), 28 U.S.C. (Section) 1498(a) and the Unconstitutional Taking of Patents, 13 Yale Journal of Law and Technology, 1–34.Google Scholar

Mincke, Wolfgang, “Property: Assets or Power? Objects or Relations as Substrates of Property Rights,” in Harris, James W. (ed.), Property Problems: From Genes to Pension Funds (London: Haag; Boston: Kluwer, 1996), 78–88 (chap. 7).Google Scholar

Mossoff, Adam, “Patents as Constitutional Private Property: The Historical Protection of Patents under the Takings Clause” (2007), 87 Boston Law Review, 689–724.Google Scholar

Mossoff, Adam, “Who Cares What Thomas Jefferson Thought about Patents? Reevaluating the Patent ‘Privilege’ in Historical Context” (2007), 92 Cornell Law Review, 953–1012.Google Scholar

Mossoff, Adam, “Exclusion and Exclusive Use in Patent Law” (2009), 22 Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 321–373.Google Scholar

Mossoff, Adam, (ed.), Intellectual Property and Property Rights (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2013).Google Scholar

Mossoff, Adam, “The Supreme Court Recognizes That Patents Are Property” (2015), Blogpost Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, June 22, 2015.Google Scholar

Muchlinski, Peter, Ortini, Frederico, & Schreuer, Christoph, The Oxford Handbook of Investment Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).Google Scholar

Munzer, Stephen R., A Theory of Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).Google Scholar

Munzer, Stephen R. (ed.), New Essays in the Legal and Political Theory of Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).Google Scholar

Munzer, Stephen R., “Property as Social Relations” (2001), in Munzer, , “New Essays in the Legal and Political Theory of Property,” pp. 36–75.Google Scholar

Munzer, Stephen R., “A Bundle Theorist Holds on to His Collection of Sticks” (2011), 8 Econ Journal Watch, 265–273.Google Scholar

Mylly, Tuomas, “The Constitutionalization of the European Legal order: Impact of Human Rights on Intellectual Property in the EU” (2015), in Geiger, (ed.), “Handbook on Human Rights and Intellectual Property Rights, pp. 103–131 (chap. 7).Google Scholar

Netanel, Neil W., “Copyright Alienability Restrictions and the Enhancement of Author Autonomy: A Normative Evaluation” (1993), 24 Rutgers Law Journal, 347–442.Google Scholar

Netanel, Neil W., “Copyright in a Democratic Civil Society” (1996), 106 Yale Law Journal, 283–387.Google Scholar

Netanel, Neil W. & Nimmer, David, “Is Copyright Property? – The Debate in Jewish Law” (2011), 12 Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 241.Google Scholar

Nimmer, Melville B. & Nimmer, David, Nimmer on Copyright (New York: Matthew Bender, 1963–2017).Google Scholar

Nozick, Robert, Anarchy, State and Utopia (Oxford: Blackwell, 1974).Google Scholar

Ohly, Ansgar, “A Fairness-based Approach to Economic Rights,” (2018), in, Reconstructing Copyright – Rethinking Copyright’s Economic Rights in a Time of Highly Dynamic Technological and Economic Change.Google Scholar

Okediji, Ruth, “Is Intellectual Property ‘Investment’? Eli Lilly v. Canada and the International Intellectual Property System” (2014), 35 University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, 1121–1138.Google Scholar

OseiTutu, J. Janewa, “Corporate ‘Human Rights’ to Intellectual Property Protection?”(2015), 55 Santa Clara Law Review, 1–51.Google Scholar

Palmer, Tom G., “Intellectual Property: A Non-Posnerian Law and Economics Approach” (1989), 12 Hamline Law Review, 261–304.Google Scholar

Penner, James E., The Idea of Property in Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996/2000).Google Scholar

Penner, James E., “On the Very Idea of Transmissible Rights,” in Penner, & Smith, , Philosophical Foundations of Property Law, pp. 246–263 (chap. 11).Google Scholar

Penner, James E. & Smith, Henry E., Philosophical Foundations of Property Law (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2013).Google Scholar

Peukert, Alexander, “Intellectual Property as an End in Itself?” (2011), 33 European Intellectual Property Review, 67–71.Google Scholar

Peukert, Alexander, “The Fundamental Right to (Intellectual) Property and the Discretion of the Legislature” (2015), in Geiger, (ed.), Research Handbook on Human Rights and IP, 132–148.Google Scholar

Peukert, Alexander, “An EU Related Right for Press Publishers Concerning Digital Uses. A Legal Analysis” (2016), 22 Research Paper of the Faculty of Law, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar

Peukert, Alexander, “Rethinking the Ontology of IP,” two unpublished manuscripts, June 2016 and May 2017.Google Scholar

Pigou, A. C., The Economics of Welfare (London: Macmillan and Co., 1st ed., 1920, 4th ed., 1932).Google Scholar

Plant, Arnold, “The Economic Aspect of Copyright in Books” (1934), 1 Economica, 167–195.Google Scholar

Plant, Arnold, “The Economic Theory Concerning Patents for Inventions” (1934), 1 Economica, 30–51.Google Scholar

Posner, Richard A., “Misappropriation: a Dirge” (2003), 40 Houston Law Review, 621–641.Google Scholar

Posner, Richard A., “The Ethical and Political Basis of the Efficiency Norm in Common Law Adjudication,” 8 Hofstra Law Review, 487–507.Google Scholar

Posner, Richard A., “Utilitarianism, Economics, and Legal Theory” (1979), 8 The Journal of Legal Studies, 103–140.Google Scholar

Posner, Richard A., “When Is Parody Fair Use?” (1992), 21 Journal of Legal Studies, 67–78.Google Scholar

Potestà, Michele, “Legitimate Expectations in Investment Treaty Law: Understanding the Roots and the Limits of a Controversial Concept” (2013), 28 ICSID Review, 88–122.Google Scholar

Purtova, Nadezhda, Property Rights in Personal Data; a European Perspective (Alphen an den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer, 2012).Google Scholar

Radin, Margaret Jane. “Property and Personhood” (1982), 34 Stanford Law Review, 957–1015.Google Scholar

Radin, Margaret Jane.“Market-Inalienability” (1987), 100 Harvard Law Review, 1849–1937.Google Scholar

Rahmatian, Andreas. Copyright and Creativity. The Making of Property Rights in Creative Works (Cheltenham UK; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 2011).Google Scholar

Rahmatian, Andreas, “Intellectual Property and the Concept of Dematerialised Property” in Bright, Susan (ed.), Modern Studies in Property Law, Vol. 6 (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2011), pp. 361–383 (chap. 17).Google Scholar

Ramsey, Lisa P. & Schovsbo, Jens, “Mechanisms for Limiting Trade Mark Rights to Further Competition and Free Speech,” 44 International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 671–700.Google Scholar

Rand, Ayn, Hessen, Robert, Greenspan, Alan, & Branden, Nathanial, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal (New York: The New American Library, 1967).Google Scholar

Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971).Google Scholar

Reichman, J. H., “Legal Hybrids between the Patent and Copyright Paradigms” (1994), 94 Columbia Law Review, 2432–2558.Google Scholar

Reinisch, August, “Expropriation” (2008), in Muchlinski, et al., The Oxford Handbook of Investment Law, pp. 407–458 (chap. 11).Google Scholar

Reinisch, August & Malintoppi, Loretta, “Methods of Dispute Resolution” (2008), in Muchlinski, et al., The Oxford Handbook of Investment Law” pp. 691–720 (chap. 18).Google Scholar

Resnik, D. B. “A Pluralistic Account of Intellectual Property” (2003), 46 Journal of Business Ethics, 319–335.Google Scholar

Ricketson, Sam & Ginsburg, Jane C., International Copyright and Neighbouring Rights. The Berne Convention and Beyond (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2nd ed., 2006).Google Scholar

Rigamonti, Cyrill P., “Deconstructing Moral Rights” (2006), 47 Harvard International Law Journal, 353–412.Google Scholar

Rognstad, Ole-Andreas, “Restructuring the Economic Rights in Copyright – Some Reflections on an ‘Alternative Model’” (2015), 62 Journal of the Copyright Society USA, 503–544.Google Scholar

Rognstad, Ole-Andreas, “Immaterialrettigheter som objekts- eller subjektsrelaterte rettigheter?; perspektiver på objektsdiskusjoner i skandinavisk rettslitteratur” (2016), 129 Tidsskrift for rettsvitenskap, 518–538.Google Scholar

Rognstad, Ole-Andreas, “Linking – a Gordian Knot of Copyright Law,” in Karnell, Gunnar et al. (eds.), Liber Amicorum Jan Rosén (Visby: Eddy, 2016), pp. 681–694.Google Scholar

Rognstad, Ole-Andreas & Poort, Joost, “The Right to a Reasonable Exploitation Concretized” (2018), in Hugenholtz, , Reconstructing Copyright – Rethinking Copyright’s Economic Rights in a Time of Highly Dynamic Technological and Economic Change.Google Scholar

Rose, Carol, “The Comedy of the Commons: Custom, Commerce, and Inherently Public Property” (1986) 53 University of Chicago Law Review, 711–781.Google Scholar

Rose, Mark, Authors and Owners: The Invention of Copyright (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993).Google Scholar

Rose-Ackerman, Susan, “Inalienability and the Theories of Property Rights” (1985), 85 Columbia Law Review, 931–969.Google Scholar

Ross, Alf, “Ophavsrettens grundbegreber” (1945), 58 Tidsskrift for rettsvitenskap, 321–358.Google Scholar

Ross, Alf, “Tû Tû” (1957), 70 Harvard Law Review, 812–825.Google Scholar

Ross, Alf, On Law and Justice (London: Steven & Sons, 1st ed., 1958; 2nd impr., 1974).Google Scholar

Ruse-Khan, Henning G., “Overlaps and Conflict Norms in Human Rights Law: Approaches of European Courts to Address Intersections with Intellectual Property Rights” (2015), in Geiger, (ed.), Handbook on Human Rights and IPRs, pp. 70–88.Google Scholar

Samuel, Geoffrey, “The Many Dimensions of Property,” in McLean, Janet (ed.), Property and the Constitution (Oxford; Portland, OR, 1999), pp. 40–63 (chap. 3).Google Scholar

Samuelson, Pamela, “Information as Property: Do Ruckelshaus and Carpenter Signal a Changing Direction in Intellectual Property Law?” (1989), 38 Catholic University Law Review, 365–400.Google Scholar

Samuelson, Pamela, “Privacy as Intellectual Property” (2000), 52 Stanford Law Review, 1125–1173.Google Scholar

Samuelson, Pamela, “A Fresh Look at Tests for Nonliteral Copyright Infringement” (2013), 107 Northwestern University Law Review, 1821–1849.Google Scholar

Sanney, Kenneth J., “Balancing the Friction: How a Constitutional Challenge to Copyright Law Could Realign the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment” (2014), 15 Columbia Science & Technology Law Review, 332–374.Google Scholar

Schnably, Stephen, “Property and Pragmatism: A Critique of Radin’s Theory of Property and Personhood” (1993), 45 Stanford Law Review, 347–407.Google Scholar

Schovsbo, Jens, “The Necessity to Collectivize Copyright and Dangers Thereof,” in Rosén, Jan (ed.), Individualism and Collectiveness in Intellectual Property Law (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2012), pp. 166–191 (chap. 8).Google Scholar

Schricker, Gerhard & Löwenheim, Ulrich (eds.), Urheberrecht: Kommentar (Munich: Beck, 5th ed. by Ulrich Löweheim, Mathias Leistner, & Ansgar Ohly, 2016).Google Scholar

Schroeder, Jeanne L., “Chix Nix Bundle-O-Stix: A Feminist Critique of the Disaggregation of Property” (1994), 93 Michigan Law Review, 239–319.Google Scholar

Schroeder, Jeanne L., “Unnatural Rights: Hegel and Intellectual Property” (2006), 60 University of Miami Law Review, 453–503.Google Scholar

Seaman, Christopher, “Permanent Injunctions in Patent Litigation after eBay: An Empirical Study (2016), 101 Iowa Law Review, 1982–2018.Google Scholar

Sherwin, Emily, “Two- and Three-Dimensional Property Rights”(1997), 29 Arizona State Law Journal, 1075–1102.Google Scholar

Shiffrin, Seana V., “Lockean Arguments for Private Intellectual Property” (2001), in Munzer, , New Essays in the Legal and Political Theory of Property, pp. 138–167.Google Scholar

Shiffrin, Seana V., “Intellectual Property,” in Goodin, Robert, Pettit, Philip, & Pogge, Thomas (eds.), A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy (Malden, MA; Oxford; Victoria, AU: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), pp. 653–668 (chap. 36).Google Scholar

Sichelman, Ted,“Purging Patent Law of ̓ ‘Private Law’ Remedies” (2014), 92 Texas Law Review, 518–571.Google Scholar

Smart, J. J. C. & Williams, Bernard, Utilitarianism: For & Against (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973).Google Scholar

Smith, Henry E., “Exclusion versus Governance: Two Strategies for Delineating Property Rights” (2002) 31 The Journal of Legal Studies, 453–487.Google Scholar

Smith, Henry E., “Intellectual Property as Property: Delineating Entitlements in Information” (2007), 116 Yale Law Journal, 1742–1822.Google Scholar

Smith, Henry E., “Property as the Law of Things” (2012), 125 Harvard Law Review, 1691–1726.Google Scholar

Smith, Henry E., “Emergent Property” (2013), in Penner, & Smith, , Philosophical Foundations of Property Law, pp. 320–338.Google Scholar

Spinello, Richard & Bottis, Maria, A Defense of Intellectual Property Right (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2009).Google Scholar

Sprigman, Chris, “Copyright and the Rule of Reason” (2009), 7 Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law, 317–342.Google Scholar

Sterk, Stewart E., “Intellectualizing Property: The Tenuous Connection between Land and Copyright” (2005), 83 Washington University Law Review, 417–470.Google Scholar

Strömholm, Stig, Verksbegreppet i upphovsrätten (Stockholm: Nordstedt, 1970) .Google Scholar

Strowel, Alain “Reconstructing the Communication to the Public and the Reproduction Rights” (2018), in Hugenholtz, , Reconstructing Copyright – Rethinking Copyright’s Economic Rights in a Time of Highly Dynamic Technological and Economic Change.Google Scholar

Sunstein, Cass R., “Legal Interference with Private Preferences” (1986), 53 University of Chicago Law Review, 1129–1174.Google Scholar

Tang, Yixin H., “The Future of Patent Enforcement after eBay v. MercExchange” (2006), 20 Harvard Law Journal of Law & Technology, 235–252.Google Scholar

Tarascio, Vincent J., Pareto’s Methodological Approach to Economics: A Study in the History of Some Scientific Aspects of Economic Thought (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1968).Google Scholar

Tedeschi, Guido, “Ownership of Organs Taken from a Living Person” (1993), 27 Israel Law Review, 624–651.Google Scholar

Thowse, Ruth, Handke, Christian, & Stepan, Paul, “The Economics of Copyright Law: A Stocktake of the Literature” (2008), 5 Review of Economic Research on Copyright Issues, 1–22.Google Scholar

Tosato, Andrea, “The UNCITRAL Annex on Security Rights in IP: A Work in Progress” (2009), 4 Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 743–750.Google Scholar

Tosato, Andrea, “Security Interest over Intellectual Property” (2011), 6 Journal of Intellectual Law and Practice, 93–104.Google Scholar

Trotter Hardy, I., “Not So Different: Tangible, Intangible, Digital, and Analog Works and Their Comparison for Copyright Purposes” (2001), 26 University of Dayton Law Review, 212–245.Google Scholar

Vaidhyanathan, Siva, Copyrights and Copywrongs: the Rise of Intellectual Property and How It Threatens Creativity (New York: New York University Press, 2001).Google Scholar

van Dijk, Niels, Grounds of the Immaterial. A Conflict Based Approach to Intellectual Property Rights (Cheltenham; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017).Google Scholar

van Houwelling, Molly S., “Touching and Concerning Copyright: Real Property Reasoning in MDY Industries, Inc. v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.” (2011), 51 Santa Clara Law Review, 1063–1085.Google Scholar

van Houwelling, Molly S., “Disciplining the Dead Hand of Copyright: Durational Limits on Remote Control Property” (2016), 30 Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 53–74.Google Scholar

Vaver, David, “Intellectual Property: The State of the Art” (2000), 116 Law Quarterly Review, 621–637.Google Scholar

von Drathen, Christian, “Patent Scope in English and German Law under the European Patent Convention 1973 and 2000 (2008), 39 International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law (IIC), 384–419.Google Scholar

Voon, Tania & Mitchell, Andrew D., “Implications of WTO Law for Plain Packaging of Tobacco Products” (2012), in Voon, et al., Public Health and Plain Packaging of Cigarettes, pp. 109–136.Google Scholar

Voon, Tania & Mitchell, Andrew D.Mitchell, Andrew D., & Munro, James, “Intellectual Property Rights in International & Investment Agreements: Striving for Coherence in National and International Law, in Lim, C. L. & Mercurio, Bryan (eds.), International Economic Law after the Global Crisis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 380–405 (chap. 16).Google Scholar

Voon, Tania, Mitchell, Andrew D., & Liberman, Jonathan (eds.), Public Health and Plain Packaging of Cigarettes (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2012).Google Scholar

Voorhoof, Dirk, “Freedom of Expression and the Right to Information: Implications for Copyright” (2015), in Geiger, , Handbook on Human Rights and Intellectual Property, pp. 331–353 (chap. 17).Google Scholar

Wagner, R. Polk, “Information Wants to Be Free: Intellectual Property and the Mythologies of Control” (2003), 103 Columbia Law Review, 995–1034.Google Scholar

Waldron, Jeremy, “Enough and as Good Left for Others” (1979), 29 Philosophical Quarterly, 319–328.Google Scholar

Waldron, Jeremy, “Two Worries about Mixing One’s Labor” (1983), 33 The Philosophical Quarterly, 37–44.Google Scholar

Waldron, Jeremy, The Right to Private Property (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988).Google Scholar

Walter, Michel & von Lewinski, Silke, European Copyright Law: A Commentary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).Google Scholar

Warming, Jens, “Om ‘grundrente’ af fiskegrunde,” 49 Nationaløkonomisk tidskrift, 499–505.Google Scholar

Weisman, Joshua, “‘Ownership,’ ‘Assets’ and ‘Transferability’ of ‘Property Rights’” (1993), 27 Israel Law Review, 652–660.Google Scholar

Wilson, James, “Ontology and the Regulation of Intellectual Property” (2010), 93 The Monist, 450–463.Google Scholar

Woodmansee, Martha, The Author, Art, and the Market. Reareading the History of Aesthetics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994).Google Scholar

Wreen, Michael, “The Ontology of Intellectual Property” (2010), 93 The Monist, 443–449.Google Scholar

Yu, Peter K., “Reconceptualizing Intellectual Property Interests in a Human Rights Framework” (2007), 40 U.C. Davis Law Review, 1039–1149.Google Scholar

Yu, Peter K., “The Objectives and Principles of the TRIPs Agreement” (2009), 46 Houston Law Review, 979–1046.Google Scholar

Yu, Peter K., “The Anatomy of the Human Rights Framework for Intellectual Property” (2016), 69 SMU Law Review, 37–95.Google Scholar

Yu, Peter K., “The Investment-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights” (2017), 66 American University Law Review, 829–908.Google Scholar

Yu, Xiao-Yang & Xu, Chiang Xin, “A Research on Intellectual Property Valuation Model under Uncertainty” (2013), 2013 International Conference on Management Science and Engineering (20th Annual Conference), 469–475.Google Scholar

Zemer, Lior, “The Making of a New Copyright Lockean” (2006), 29 Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 891–947.Google Scholar