IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rripxx/v20y2013i1p52-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framing standards, mobilizing users: Copyright versus fair use in transnational regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Leonhard Dobusch
  • Sigrid Quack

Abstract

Following the agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) intellectual property rights, and more specifically copyright, have become the subject of highly politicized conflicts. In this paper we analyze how these conflicts shifted from the political arena to private standard-setting sites, where two opposing coalitions of actors pursued competing initiatives - an industry coalition which aimed at enforcing copyright protection through Digital Rights Management and an emerging coalition of civil society actors which sought to develop a digital commons based on copyleft licenses. Paradoxically, the industry coalition, which had very successfully lobbied international organizations, ran into trouble developing and enforcing private regulation in the market place, while the civil society coalition proved to be more effective in the market than in the political sphere. The findings of our analysis indicate that the strategic use of organizational forms and collective action frames can be more decisive for the mobilization of users than material resources, and that the success of collective action frames depends on their compatibility with user practices. Based on the argument that regime shifting from intergovernmental to private governance can open up new and favorable spaces for weak actors to experiment with alternative forms of regulation, the paper contributes to the literature on the politics of regime complexity. The paper furthermore highlights the importance of studying non-elite actors and their day-to-day practices to gain a better understanding of changes within the international political economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonhard Dobusch & Sigrid Quack, 2013. "Framing standards, mobilizing users: Copyright versus fair use in transnational regulation," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 52-88, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rripxx:v:20:y:2013:i:1:p:52-88
    DOI: 10.1080/09692290.2012.662909
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09692290.2012.662909
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09692290.2012.662909?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sell,Susan K., 2003. "Private Power, Public Law," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521819145.
    2. Sell,Susan K., 2003. "Private Power, Public Law," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521525398.
    3. Sebastian Botzem, 2012. "The Politics of Accounting Regulation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13992.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Klaus Dingwerth, 2017. "Field Recognition and the State Prerogative: Why Democratic Legitimation Recedes in Private Transnational Sustainability Regulation," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(1), pages 75-84.
    2. Madison Cartwright, 2021. "Business conflict and international law: The political economy of copyright in the United States," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 152-167, January.
    3. Thomas Hale & David Held & Kevin Young, 2013. "Gridlock: From Self-reinforcing Interdependence to Second-order Cooperation Problems," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 4(3), pages 223-235, September.
    4. Leonhard Dobusch & Markus Lang & Sigrid Quack, 2017. "Open to Feedback? Formal and Informal Recursivity in Creative Commons’ Transnational Standard-Setting," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(3), pages 353-363, September.
    5. Jean-Frédéric Morin, 2020. "Concentration despite competition: The organizational ecology of technical assistance providers," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 75-107, January.
    6. Hanna Hilbrandt & Monika Grubbauer, 2020. "Standards and SSOs in the contested widening and deepening of financial markets: The arrival of Green Municipal Bonds in Mexico City," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(7), pages 1415-1433, October.
    7. Malets, Olga, 2017. "Globalization, governance and the nation-state: An Overview," economic sociology. perspectives and conversations, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, vol. 18(2), pages 16-24.
    8. Alejandro Milcíades Peña, 2018. "The politics of resonance: Transnational sustainability governance in Argentina," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 150-170, March.
    9. Malets, Olga, 2013. "The effectiveness of transnational non-state governance: The role of domestic regulations and compliance assessment in practice," MPIfG Discussion Paper 13/12, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bayer, Patrick & Marcoux, Christopher & Urpelainen, Johannes, 2013. "Leveraging private capital for climate mitigation: Evidence from the Clean Development Mechanism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 14-24.
    2. Anne Roemer-Mahler, 2013. "Business conflict and global politics: The pharmaceutical industry and the global protection of intellectual property rights," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 121-152, February.
    3. Emilie Cloatre & Robert Dingwall, 2013. "“Embedded regulation:” The migration of objects, scripts, and governance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(3), pages 365-386, September.
    4. Suma Athreye & Lucia Piscitello & Kenneth C. Shadlen, 2020. "Twenty-five years since TRIPS: Patent policy and international business," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 315-328, December.
    5. Iain M. Cockburn & Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2016. "Patents and the Global Diffusion of New Drugs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(1), pages 136-164, January.
    6. Daniel Berliner & Aseem Prakash, 2012. "From norms to programs: The United Nations Global Compact and global governance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(2), pages 149-166, June.
    7. Francesca Spigarelli & Hao Way, 2012. "The rising Chinese pharmaceutical industry: local champions vs global players," Working Papers 1206, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    8. Madison Cartwright, 2021. "Business conflict and international law: The political economy of copyright in the United States," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 152-167, January.
    9. Suzuki, Mao, 2020. "Profits before patients? Analyzing donors’ economic motives for foreign aid in the health sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    10. Jean‐Frédéric Morin & Madison Cartwright, 2020. "The US and EU’s Intellectual Property Initiatives in Asia: Competition, Coordination or Replication?," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 11(5), pages 557-568, November.
    11. Tristan Auvray & Cédric Durand & Joel Rabinovich & Cecilia Rikap, 2021. "Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 431-457, December.
    12. Haunss, Sebastian, 2013. "Enforcement vs. access: wrestling with intellectual property on the internet," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 2(2), pages 1-9.
    13. Richard Pomfret & Keith Maskus, 2014. "The New Globalisation of Intellectual Property Rights: What's New This Time?," Australian Economic History Review, Economic History Society of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 54(3), pages 262-284, November.
    14. El-Bialy, Nora, 2010. "The role of institutions within the IPR enforcement: The case of de facto software protection in Egypt," Discussion Papers on Strategy and Innovation 10-02, Philipps-University Marburg, Department of Technology and Innovation Management (TIM).
    15. Park, June & Chung, Eunbin, 2021. "Learning from past pandemic governance: Early response and Public-Private Partnerships in testing of COVID-19 in South Korea," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    16. Blandine Laperche, 2008. "Stratégies d’innovation des firmes des sciences de la vie et appropriation des ressources végétales : processus et enjeux Innovations strategies of firms in life science and appropriation of vegetal r," Working Papers 189, Laboratoire de Recherche sur l'Industrie et l'Innovation. ULCO / Research Unit on Industry and Innovation.
    17. Amandine Bled, 2009. "Business to the rescue: private sector actors and global environmental regimes’ legitimacy," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 153-171, May.
    18. Jandhyala, Srividya, 2015. "International and domestic dynamics of intellectual property protection," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 284-293.
    19. Christopher May, 2006. "Escaping the TRIPs’ Trap: The Political Economy of Free and Open Source Software in Africa," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(1), pages 123-146, March.
    20. Oran Young, 2004. "Institutions and the Growth of Knowledge: Evidence from International Environmental Regimes," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 215-228, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rripxx:v:20:y:2013:i:1:p:52-88. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rrip20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.