Studies in Science of Science ›› 2025, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (6): 1190-1196.

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Epistemological Changes and Governance of Intellectual Property in the Era of Sharing Economy:From the Perspective of Networked Open Innovation

  

  • Received:2024-04-17 Revised:2024-05-24 Online:2025-06-15 Published:2025-06-15

共享经济时代知识产权财产认识论变革与治理———以网络化开放创新为切入点

林韶   

  1. 浙江大学
  • 通讯作者: 林韶
  • 基金资助:
    网络化开放创新范式下企业知识产权市场化保护与价值转化机制研究

Abstract: In the era of the sharing economy, exclusivity plays a central role in intellectual property rights. Facing systemic challenges brought about by digital technology-driven and corporate innovation paradigm changes, the "bundle of rights" analytical paradigm breaks through the traditional civil law property rights research paradigm and provides insights into intellectual property rights. Securing otherness provides the basis for interpretation theory. The transformation of intellectual property epistemology from "exclusivity as the center" to "the integration of exclusivity and inclusivity" shows that the exclusivity and inclusivity of intellectual property are not absolutely closed in the era of sharing economy, and that the content of intellectual property is the "bundle of rights" The interpretation results of the analysis paradigm of power separation also match the development model of enterprise networked open innovation. It has important economic and social functions and will inevitably have an impact on the social relations of open and shared intellectual property rights. The risk management of intellectual property content should focus on multiple entities such as governments and platforms to explore the benign governance of the relationship between "technology" and "law" in intellectual property content.

摘要: 共享经济时代,排他性在知识产权中的核心地位面临数字技术驱动和企业创新范式迭代的系统性挑战,“权利束”分析范式突破传统大陆法财产权研究范式,为知识产权财产的容他性提供了解释论基础。从“以排他性为中心”到“排他性与容他性”相融共生的知识产权认识论变革,表明知识产权的排他性与容他性在共享经济时代不是绝对封闭的,而是兼具开放性和包容性。知识产权容他是“权利束”分析范式权能分离的解释结果,也与企业网络化开放创新的发展范式相吻合,具有重要的经济功能和社会功能,将对知识产权开放共享的社会关系产生深远影响。知识产权容他的风险治理,应围绕政府和平台等多元主体探寻财产容他关系“技术”与“法律”的协同治理之道。