Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T23:15:25.627Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Property and privatisation in RoboCop

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2009

Michael Robertson
Michael Robertson*
Affiliation:
University of Otago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The 1987 film RoboCop is not just a science fiction action story; it is also a critique of the neoliberal resurgence in law and politics at the end of the twentieth century. In particular it critiques the privatisation of police services, and the expansion of private property claims to cover a cyborg policeman, notwithstanding its human components. I connect the critique in the film with the broader academic literature dealing with the privatisation of police forces and the expansion of private property claims, particularly copyright and patents. Finally, I consider whether, as a result of the neoliberal expansion of private property rights over the last few decades, the law could now justify a private property claim over a cyborg like the one in the film.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Law in Context , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , September 2008 , pp. 217 - 235
Copyright
Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andreasson, Stefan (2006) ‘Stand and Deliver: Private Property and the Politics of Global Dispossession’, Political Studies 54: 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, Theodore (1974) ‘The Place of Private Police in Society: An Area of Research for the Social Sciences, Social Problems, 21: 438–453.Google Scholar
Bislev, Sven (2004) ‘Globalization, State Transformation, and Public Security’, International Political Science Review 25: 281–296.Google Scholar
Bollier, David (2002) Silent Theft. The Private Plunder of Our Common Wealth. London: RoutledgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, James (2003) ‘The Second Enclosure Movement and the Construction of the Public Domain’, Law and Contemporary Problems: The Public Domain 66: 33–74.Google Scholar
Boyle, James (2007) ‘Cultural Environmentalism and Beyond’, in Law and Contemporary Problems: Cultural Environmentalism @10. 70: 5–21.Google Scholar
Bucy, Pamela (1996) ‘Privatizing Law Enforcement’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 543: 144–153.Google Scholar
Cheney, Annie (2006) Body Brokers. Inside America’s Underground Trade in Human Remains. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
Chin, Andrew (2005) ‘Research in the Shadow of DNA Patents’, Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society 87: 846–906.Google Scholar
Cockett, Richard (1994) Thinking the Unthinkable. Think-Tanks and the Economic Counter-Revolution, 1931–1983. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Codell, Julie (1989) ‘Murphy’s Law, RoboCop’s Body, and Capitalism’s Work’, Jump Cut: A Review of Contemporary Media 34: 12–19.Google Scholar
Dalziel, Paul and St. John, Susan (1999) ‘The Role of Government’ in Boston, J. Dalziel, P. and St. John, S. (eds) Redesigning the Welfare State in New Zealand: Problems, Policies, and Prospects. Auckland: Oxford University Press, chapter 5.Google Scholar
Davis, M., Lundman, R. and Martinez Jr., R. (1991) ‘Private Corporate Justice: Store Police, Shoplifters, and Civil Recovery’, Social Problems, 38: 395–411.Google Scholar
Dratler Jr., Jay (2003) ‘Does Lord Darcy yet live? The Case Against Software and Business-method Patents’, Santa Clara Law Review 43: 823–899.Google Scholar
Dratler Jr., Jay (2005) ‘Alice in Wonderland Meets the U.S. Patent System’, Akron Law Review 38: 299–336.Google Scholar
Fixler, Philip and Poole, Robert (1988) ‘Can Police Services be Privatized?’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 498: 108–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Michele (2006) Black Markets. The Supply and Demand of Body Parts, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hardcastle, Rohan J. (2007) Law and the Human Body: Property Rights, Ownership and Control. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Harris, J. W. (1996) ‘Who Owns My Body?’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 16: 55–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, Paul and Connolly, Kate (2002) ‘World Trade in Bodies is Linked to Corpse Art Show’, The Observer, Sunday 17 March.Google Scholar
Harvey, David (2005) A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heller, Michael (1998) ‘The Tragedy of the Anticommons. Property in the Transition from Marx to Markets’, Harvard Law Review 111: 622–688.Google Scholar
Heller, Michael and Eisenberg, Rebecca (1998) ‘Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research’ Science 280: 698–701.Google Scholar
Herring, Jonathan (2002) ‘Giving, Selling and Sharing Bodies’, in Bainham, A., Sclater, S. and Richards, M. (eds) Body Lore and Laws. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 43–61.Google Scholar
Klein, Naomi (2002) Fences and Windows. London: Flamingo.Google Scholar
Levmore, Saul (2003) ‘Property’s Uneasy Path and Expanding Future’, University of Chicago Law Review 70: 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moyle, Paul (ed.) (1994) Private Prisons and Police. Recent Australian Trends. Leichhardt: Pluto Press Australia.Google Scholar
Reich, Charles (1964) ‘The New Property’, Yale Law Journal 73: 733–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, Michael (2003) ‘Research and Academic Freedom’ in John, Dawson and Nicola, Peart (eds) The Law of Research. Dunedin: University of Otago Press, 27–45.Google Scholar
Robertson, Michael (2005) ‘Seeing Blind Spots: Corporate Misconduct in Film and Law’ in Freeman, Michael (ed.) Law and Popular Culture: Current Legal Issues Volume 7. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Carol (2003) ‘Romans, Roads, and Romantic Creators: Traditions of Public Property in the Information Age’, Law and Contemporary Problems: The Public Domain 66: 89–110.Google Scholar
Rose, Mark (2003) ‘Nine-tenths of the Law: The English Copyright Debates and the Rhetoric of the Public Domain’, Law and Contemporary Problems: The Public Domain 66: 75–87.Google Scholar
Seidenberg, Steve (2008) ‘Reinventing Patent Law: The Pendulum is Swinging for a System Which has Long Favoured the Rights of the Paten Holders’, ABA Journal 94: 58–63.Google Scholar
Skegg, P. D. G. (1992) ‘Medical Uses of Corpses and the “No Property” Rule’, Medicine, Science and the Law 32: 311–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spitzer, Steven and Scull, Andrew (1977) ‘Privatisation and Capitalist Development: The Case of the Private Police’, Social Problems 25: 18–29.Google Scholar
Sprigman, Christopher (2004) ‘Reform(aliz)ing Copyright’, Stanford Law Review 57: 485–568.Google Scholar
Stewart, James (1985) ‘Public Safety and Private Police’, Public Administration Review November: 758–765.Google Scholar
Telotte, J. P. (1991) ‘The Tremulous Public Body: Robots, Change, and the Science Fiction Film’, Journal of Popular Film and Television 19: 14–23.Google Scholar
Telotte, J. P. (2001) ‘The Science Fiction Film as Uncanny Text’ in Telotte, J. P., (ed.) Science Fiction Film. New York: Cambridge University Press, 161–178.Google Scholar
Thompson, E. P. (1991) Customs in Common. London: Merlin Press.Google Scholar
Van Houweling, Molly (2007) ‘Cultural Environmentalism and the Constructed Commons’, Law and Contemporary Problems: Cultural Environmentalism @10 70: 23–50.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, Stephen (2003) Bodies for Sale. Ethics and Exploitation in the Human Body Trade. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar