essay on economic liberalization in india

Introductions are usually % of the length of an a typical essay. Readers gain their first impressions of a paper from this section, so an effective introduction is.

Question: Assess the impact of digital information, particularly that of computer programs, on Intellectual Property Law. What can be and has been done to meet the demands of this dynamic new area of law. Answer: This essay shall focus on the impact of Digital Information, and particularly that of computer programs, on Intellectual Property law, and what can be and has been done to meet the demands Answer: The Copyright, Design and Patents Act was implemented to protect the creator of an original work. Question: How do moral rights differ from other rights in copyright?

Critically discuss particularly in the context of multi media work. Answer: Copyright can be thought of as a bundle of economic rights and moral rights. The basic framework of these rights is statutory, although the explanatory case law is of great importance. Question: What is intellectual property? How is it justified?

Social Links

However, the change in the commercial climate has meant that there is Critically discuss this statement. LLB Hons. Answer: Introduction The aim of this coursework is to understand the nature of Passing Off and its key concepts and through judicial statements be able to define passing off, an area of intellectual It being by him removed from the common state nature placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men.

It is a creative and purposeful act that extends the limits of personality to physical objects previously in the common stock.

This can be interpreted tautologically since labor includes every act of appropriation and acorns lying on the ground have no value to human life until they are picked up and eaten, but Locke means more than this. God may have given the world to men, but in order to enjoy the gift, men have to create property by exercising their creative intelligence and their bodies in physical labor.

While Locke argues that men have a right to create and enjoy their property, he also argues that there are limits to that right in the state of nature. The first limit is alluded to when he describes how property is created. Locke does not stress this limitation, but puts most of the force of the limitation on property on his next argument.

Whatever is beyond this, is more than his share, and belongs to others.


Locke infers that as long as men heed the injunction not to allow anything to go to waste uselessly in their possession, there will in this early state of nature, be plenty of land and resources to go around for everyone. He argues further that originally in the state of nature, there was no incentive for anyone to try to accumulate more property than he could use since most goods were perishable.

In fact, Locke seems to describe an early state of existence in which populations were small and resources abundant although the general level of wealth was probably very low. There was no accumulation of wealth and relatively little land ownership in a basically nomadic population. He apparently believes men found this original economic organization to be inconvenient because he describes a process by which men find a way to accumulate wealth by developing a money economy:.

He that gathered a hundred bushels of acorns or apples, had thereby a property in them; they were his goods as soon as gathered. He was only to look that he used them before they spoiled; else he took more than his share, and robbed others…. If he gave away a part to any body else, so that it perished not uselessly in his possession, these he also made use of. And if he also bartered away plumbs that would have rotted in a week, for nuts that would last good for his eating a whole year, he did no injury, he wasted not the common stock; destroyed no part of the portion of goods that belonged to others, so long as nothing perished uselessly in his hands.

Again, if he would give his nuts for a piece of metal, pleased with its color; or exchange his sheep for shells, or wool for a sparkling pebble or a diamond, and keep those by him all his life, he invaded not the right of others, he might heap up as much of those durable things as he pleased; the exceeding of the bounds of his just property not lying in the largeness of his possession, but the perishing of any thing uselessly in it. And thus came in the use of money, some lasting thing that men might keep without spoiling, and that by mutual consent men would take in exchange for the truly useful, but perishable supports of life.

Thus, although nature puts both a moral and an effective limit on the amount of property anyone can accumulate, the amount he can use without allowing anything to spoil, the limit is not defined by the amount of anything a person owns, but by the consequences of ownership. Consequently, Locke reasons, men will try to find ways of storing their excess products by trading perishable goods for more durable ones that can be used in the future.

In the course of this trading process, he implies, one commodity, the most durable and easily tradable one, eventually becomes commonly acceptable as a money commodity. Locke describes this process as men consenting to use money, a form of agreement which enables men to avoid the disadvantages implicit in the original natural limits to property ownership in the state of nature.

Account Options

While the use of money is a reasonable way of getting around the difficulties of storing wealth, its consequences are profound. Hence overcoming the spoilage limitation also implies the end to the certainty that no one will be adversely affected by property ownership.

Locke seems to argue that the consequences will be property disputes and increasing concern for personal safety, although these consequences follow as much from the growth of population as from increasing resource scarcity brought about by the introduction of money into the state of nature. The result, however, is that men will find it greatly to their advantage to come together to form a contract to enter into civil society and establish a government.

The reason, then, that men form societies and governments is to protect their property which Locke takes to include life, liberty, and estate. By agreeing to give up his right to be a judge in his own case, each man gains the benefits of increased order and security.

Second Treatise of Government Essay Questions | GradeSaver

Hence the ownership of private property is one of the major causes of the existence of the state. Once men form states, the government is expected to rule in the public good and not for its own good, and one of the ways it fulfills this charge is by regulating property so as to make it secure. Should the government fail to meet its obligations, for instance by arbitrarily confiscating property, the citizens have the right to change the government. The exposition seems fraught with inconsistencies and partially explained ideas.

Locke seems to raise more problems than he solves and one cannot help but wonder not only what Locke meant to say, but also what he actually said. The problems are by no means trivial ones. The kinds of questions Locke scholars try to answer are some of the most profound in political philosophy: Did Locke believe in natural law? What were the characteristics of the state of nature where men were presumed to live without government?

Was it peaceful or chaotic, poverty stricken or comfortable?

The answer to these questions implies a view of the contribution of government to human welfare. How much property did Locke think any one individual was entitled to own? Did he approve of acquisitive behavior? Why should men be willing to trade their natural freedom for the restrictions of civil society? Once they do, what is the status of property in civil society?

How one decides which statements Locke means and which are unimportant or slips is another question. The primary case in point to Kendall is the right to property. Although he agrees that Locke seems to give individuals an unquestioned right to the property they create by the mixing of their own labor with land in the state of nature. This in itself does not mitigate the individualist nature of the right to property, however, since it is not clear that a moral duty should be enforced by an agency outside of the individual. Kendall argues that the import of these passages is to make of property nothing more than an expedient for improving the lot of mankind; property ownership is justified not because it conforms with natural law per se, but because it is the best means to the end of preserving mankind.

Kendall further strengthens his claim by arguing:.

How to Analyze The Offer on a Contracts Essay Question

Here, Kendall has gone too far. It is unquestionable that Locke believed property ownership would always benefit society as a whole, but the justification was not one of expediency. The first is the natural rights argument where self-ownership implies ownership of those goods created by men through labor. This right is absolute in that it follows from natural law and reason, although it is bounded by the limitation that no one may permit resources to spoil in his possession, and, possibly, that there be alternative opportunities for others to create their own property.

  • Siegel's Property: Essay and Multiple-Choice Questions and Answers;
  • About EssaySauce, the student essay site:.
  • the impact of advertising essay;

The fact that there are limits to the right to property does not make it less individualistic, however. The second kind of argument in favor of private property is what Kendall calls the expedient. As we have seen, Locke calls attention to the productivity of labor by pointing out in various instances how labor contributes to the greatest part of the value of all things.

Let anyone consider, what the difference is between an acre of land planted with tobacco or sugar, sown with wheat or barley; and an acre of the same land lying in common, without any husbandry upon it, and he will find that the improvement of labour makes the far greater part of the value. He that incloses land and has a greater plenty of the conveniencys of life from ten acres, than he could have from an hundred left to nature, may truly be said to give ninety acres to mankind.

For his labour now supplies him with provisions out of ten acres which were but the product of an hundred lying in common. This is not the case. Although Locke used the language of natural law and natural rights, of limitation on property and of charity, the language was simply a cover that allowed him to convey his true message while avoiding hostility on the part of the reader.

Strauss reasons that if Locke appears contradictory, perhaps he was deliberately contradictory to serve his greater purpose. Strauss believes that Locke used the language of natural law and natural rights, charity, and restraint to make his message more pallatable to his audience.

By reading Locke this way, of course, Strauss ignores or discounts all those passages which drove Kendall to see Locke as a collectivist in individualist clothing. Strauss and Kendall cannot both be right.

Topics Tested on the Multistate Essay Exam

The second question raised by Strauss is substantive. He rarely uttered a controversial word in the political arena, and when he did commit himself to writing, he refused to acknowledge his authorship. The same can be said about his views on religion which were suspected of being heterodox in the extreme. He did not relish open debate, and neither would he have been willing to lose his political influence as a result of being embroiled in too much public controversy.

Even more importantly, where political writings were concerned, controversial doctrines were frequently held to be seditious doctrines and could lead the author straight to the gallows. That the views Locke was trying to insinuate in his writings were Hobbesian, as Strauss and Cox maintain, does not necessarily follow. His caution is adequately explained by the radical nature of his arguments for government by contract, the limited powers of even elected officials and the right of oppressed populations to change rulers. Land reform dissertation. Accounting assistant cover letter sample modicare business plan in hindi ppt.

Hate speech is free speech essay. Job application letter fresh graduate teacher. Is a cover letter necessary with a resume. Thesis statement for breastfeeding vs formula. Application letter clerk. School homework planner tanbridge. Writing a thesis for a compare and contrast essay. Thesis topics in educational administration and planning in nigeria. A level product design coursework mark scheme. Clothing company business plan sample pdf. Ttu thesis and dissertation. Research paper ideas biology. Case study of hamburger plus. Similarities between marketing plan and business plan.