Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-66nw2 Total loading time: 0.253 Render date: 2021-12-08T06:29:02.150Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

11 - Intellectual Property

Implicit Racial and Gender Bias in Right of Publicity Cases and Intellectual Property Law Generally

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Justin D. Levinson
Affiliation:
University of Hawaii, School of Law
Robert J. Smith
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, School of Law
Get access

Summary

Connecting Race and Gender to Intellectual Property Law

Intellectual property (IP) rights have a tremendous impact on the production, control, and direction of culture and identity in American society. The dominant players in the entertainment and advertising industries seek to control wealth and to profit from the ability to influence the direction of culture and identity in American society; for example, institutional copyright holders are concerned with maintaining the status quo that favors their interests over those who have been historically disenfranchised and oppressed by the unauthorized and uncompensated exploitation of their personas and identities. These dominant players, the “haves,” continue to benefit from the head start they achieved as a result of their white privilege that afforded them the ability to serve as the architects of the current intellectual property law regime favoring print, broadcast, and digital media interests.

No longer is overt racism or sexism necessary to maintain the status quo in favor of institutional copyright holders; instead, two of the more pernicious influences on directing outcomes in intellectual property law cases are, first and foremost, the belief that American copyright law is superior to publicity rights law and, second, the unconscious deployment of highly subjective beliefs and stereotypes by decision-makers who are required to settle disputes between institutional copyright holders and disenfranchised publicity rights holders, many of whom are African American and women. These well-meaning decision-makers, practitioners, and even scholarly commentators are convinced that intellectual property law is immune from implicit race and gender bias. In an attempt to respond to the cacophonous claims that intellectual property protection and enforcement regimes in America are race neutral, this chapter presents the theory that implicit bias is present and operating in the intellectual property law sphere generally and in the right of publicity sector specifically. Understanding how implicit bias functions in intellectual property domains will allow us to address to what extent intellectual property law and its application can respond to the reality of implicit bias and then to accept the challenge of taking steps to address what forms of distributive justice are appropriate for rights holders whose social and economic interests have been marginalized, disenfranchised, and subordinated by unconscious biases permeating this sphere of law.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

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

Conway, Danielle M.Indigenizing Intellectual Property Law: Customary Law, Legal Pluralism, and the Protection of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights, Identity, and Resources 15 2009
Conway, Danielle M. 2011
Greene, K.J.Intellectual Property at the Intersection of Race and Gender: Lady Sings the Blues 16 2007
Aoki, KeithDistributive and Syncretic Motives in Intellectual Property Law (With Special Reference to Coercion, Agency, and Development) 40 2007
Yancy, C.The Stuart Double Plow and Double Scraper: The Invention of a Slave 69 1984
2007
2007

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×