Posted by Yogesh Malhotra on September 12, 1997 at 00:24:04:

In Reply to: Free use of knowledge means little knowledge creation posted by Harida on September 10, 1997 at 03:46:45:

Perhaps the conundrum arises by considering 'free use of knowledge' as synonymous with 'free use of knowledge products,' latter representing giving away one's intellectual property without any credit. Having not read Thurow's article, I am presuming that he is suggesting that the "free use of _intellectual property_ ends up with societies that create too little _intellectual property_"

The essence of Thurow's argument is about the incentives and motivation inherent in the creation of new intellectual property such as copyrights, patents and trade marks. If sufficient protection is not granted to the intellectual property creation process, the investment of time and money by individuals and / or organizations in developing proprietary 'knowledge products' (intellectual property) is threatened because they don't stand a chance of recovering their investments or earning a return on their investment of intellectual capital. This is the very basis for laws, such as software copyright laws, that attempt to protect the rights of the copyright holder. Software Publishers' Association and Business Software Alliance are two examples of organizations that are attempting to fight infringement of software copyrights at an international level. Several major US companies, including Microsoft, are backing these efforts to safeguard their investments in similar information products.

However, the above representation portrays an overly simplistic picture... There are many interesting aspects that underlie the giving away of such 'information products.' Take for instance the example of the Netscape browser, Excite search engine, certain Internet servers, and many similar software products available at the click of the mouse: that are available for free to major categories of users (such as the educational sector). Even to many other categories of users such software is being made available free of charge for an extended trial period. The incentives lie in seeding the market, gaining the first mover advantage, or 'giving away free razors to make money on blades' [giving away free software / hardware and make money on the monthly/yearly usage fees, upgrades, and / or add-on products].

One is also reminded of this week's Wall Street Journal cover story about Microsoft which underscored that company's attempt at being highlighted as the 'Biggest Donor' for its charities of software products to non-profit organizations. The article observed that the marginal costs in the production of such 'information products' are minimal, however, companies can still claim millions of dollars as 'benevolent charity' based on market retail prices or wholesale prices of their software products. Most such moves by companies are not only intended at gaining the good will of their stakeholders, but also building up the product brand and creating scope for selling future services to the 'benefactors.'

However, in all such situations the intellectual property is not just given away for free, it is protected by the copyrights, patents and trademarks the company has secured for such products. Even 'freely' downloadable software and 'freely' available web sites comes with their copyrights, trademarks and disclaimers, essentially to safeguard the intellectual investment made by the responsible parties.

One may like to observe in passing that some of the globally popular software packages were those that were most heavily pirated (copied without authorization). In contrast, it is chronicled that Apple lost its market advantage by being very secretive about the source code of some of its key products (Malhotra 1993, 1994a, 19994b).

While one may agree that investment of intellectual capital must be safeguarded, however, one must distinguish this issue from the sharing or creation of knowledge. As argued elsewhere (Malhotra 1997), knowledge is created by the humans when they interact with information. "To conceive of knowledge as a collection of information seems to rob the concept of all of its life... Knowledge resides in the user and not in the collection. It is how the user reacts to a collection of information that matters." Churchman (1971, p. 10). In this context, most kinds of 'information products' (intellectual property) are appropriated by the users who go about creating and sharing knowledge using such products. Given the premise of the non-linear, discontinuously changing environment, the only assurance against 'hardwiring of assumptions' is through dialog that encourages surfacing of assumptions... that makes individual knowledge explicit... allows social appropriation of individual knowledge... and social interaction that translates explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge of the various members of the 'community of practice.'

This is the model adopted by many global forums such as @BRINT: they attempt to safeguard their intellectual investment in 'knowledge products' by means of copyrights, trademarks and patents, while simultaneously facilitating knowledge sharing and knowledge creation within their community of subscribers. Hence, the two processes are distinct, but complementary in nature.

Related References

Malhotra, Yogesh. "Knowledge Management in Inquiring Organizations," in the Proceedings of 3rd Americas Conference on Information Systems (Philosophy of Information Systems Mini-track), Indianapolis, IN, August 15-17, 1997, pp. 293-295.

Malhotra, Yogesh. "Controlling Copyright Infringements of Intellectual Property," Journal of Systems Management, vol. 45, no. 7, July 1994, pp. 12-17.

Malhotra, "Controlling Copyright Infringements of Intellectual Property: The Case of Computer Software," Journal of Systems Management, vol. 45, no. 6, June 1994, pp. 32-35.

Barton, Laurence & Yogesh Malhotra, "International Infringement of Software as Intellectual Property," Industrial Management & Data Systems (UK), vol. 93, no. 8, 1993, pp.20-28.

- Yogesh Malhotra

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: Knowledge Sharing, Knowledge Products & Intellectual Property david pearce 04:22:58 10/15/97 (3)
  • Re: Knowledge Sharing, Knowledge Products & Intellectual Property David Pearce 04:24:55 10/15/97 (2)
    • Re: Knowledge Sharing, Knowledge Products & Intellectual Property Sangwon,Kim 08:16:10 10/08/98 (1)
      • Re: Knowledge Sharing, Knowledge Products & Intellectual Property Paul Stetton-Stephens 14:13:05 11/17/98 (0)
• Re: Knowledge Sharing, Knowledge Products & Intellectual Property David Pearce 03:47:00 10/15/97 (3)
  • Re: Knowledge Sharing, Knowledge Products & Intellectual Property Bryan Geraldo 12:12:58 2/18/98 (2)
    • Re: Knowledge Sharing, Knowledge Products & Intellectual Property Annemiek 05:28:02 2/24/98 (0)
    • Re: Knowledge Sharing, Knowledge Products & Intellectual Property Yogesh Malhotra 13:13:36 2/18/98 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: