nc33/MultiSpan_SQUAD huggingface dataset:
Intellectual_property

The concept's origins can potentially be traced back further. Jewish law includes several considerations whose effects are similar to those of modern intellectual property laws, though the notion of intellectual creations as property does not seem to exist – notably the principle of Hasagat Ge'vul (unfair encroachment) was used to justify limited-term publisher (but not author) copyright in the 16th century. In 500 BCE, the government of the Greek state of Sybaris offered one year's patent "to all who should discover any new refinement in luxury".

Question: Jewish law includes which principle used to justify copyright?
Answer: Hasagat Ge'vul (unfair encroachment)

Question: When did Jewish law recognize copyright?
Answer: in the 16th century

Question: How long was a patent valid in Sybaris?
Answer: one year

Question: When did Sybaris offer patents?
Answer: 500 BCE
Intellectual_property

A patent is a form of right granted by the government to an inventor, giving the owner the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering to sell, and importing an invention for a limited period of time, in exchange for the public disclosure of the invention. An invention is a solution to a specific technological problem, which may be a product or a process and generally has to fulfil three main requirements: it has to be new, not obvious and there needs to be an industrial applicability.:17

Question: Who grants a patent?
Answer: the government

Question: Who is a patent granted to?
Answer: an inventor

Question: How many requirements does an invention need to fulfill for a patent?
Answer: three

Question: An invention is a solution to what type of problem?
Answer: technological

Question: What is a patent offered in exchange for?
Answer: public disclosure of the invention
Intellectual_property

The stated objective of most intellectual property law (with the exception of trademarks) is to "Promote progress." By exchanging limited exclusive rights for disclosure of inventions and creative works, society and the patentee/copyright owner mutually benefit, and an incentive is created for inventors and authors to create and disclose their work. Some commentators have noted that the objective of intellectual property legislators and those who support its implementation appears to be "absolute protection". "If some intellectual property is desirable because it encourages innovation, they reason, more is better. The thinking is that creators will not have sufficient incentive to invent unless they are legally entitled to capture the full social value of their inventions". This absolute protection or full value view treats intellectual property as another type of "real" property, typically adopting its law and rhetoric. Other recent developments in intellectual property law, such as the America Invents Act, stress international harmonization. Recently there has also been much debate over the desirability of using intellectual property rights to protect cultural heritage, including intangible ones, as well as over risks of commodification derived from this possibility. The issue still remains open in legal scholarship.

Question: What is the stated objective of most intellectual property law?
Answer: Promote progress.

Question: What do patents create an incentive for inventors to do?
Answer: create and disclose their work

Question: Which view treats intellectual property as another type of "real" property?
Answer: absolute protection or full value

Question: Which recent law stresses international harmonization?
Answer: America Invents Act
Intellectual_property

In 2013 the United States Patent & Trademark Office approximated that the worth of intellectual property to the U.S. economy is more than US$5 trillion and creates employment for an estimated 18 million American people. The value of intellectual property is considered similarly high in other developed nations, such as those in the European Union. In the UK, IP has become a recognised asset class for use in pension-led funding and other types of business finance. However, in 2013, the UK Intellectual Property Office stated: "There are millions of intangible business assets whose value is either not being leveraged at all, or only being leveraged inadvertently".

Question: How much was the worth of intellectual property to the U.S. economy in 2013?
Answer: more than US$5 trillion

Question: How many Americans did intellectual property create employment for in 2013?
Answer: 18 million

Question: Where has IP become a recognised asset class?
Answer: the UK

Question: How many intangible assets are not being leveraged in the UK?
Answer: millions
Intellectual_property

Patent infringement typically is caused by using or selling a patented invention without permission from the patent holder. The scope of the patented invention or the extent of protection is defined in the claims of the granted patent. There is safe harbor in many jurisdictions to use a patented invention for research. This safe harbor does not exist in the US unless the research is done for purely philosophical purposes, or in order to gather data in order to prepare an application for regulatory approval of a drug. In general, patent infringement cases are handled under civil law (e.g., in the United States) but several jurisdictions incorporate infringement in criminal law also (for example, Argentina, China, France, Japan, Russia, South Korea).

Question: What is caused by using or selling a patented invention without permission?
Answer: Patent infringement

Question: Where does the safe harbor to use a patented invention for research generally not exist?
Answer: in the US

Question: What type of law handles patent infringement cases in the US?
Answer: civil

Question: What type of law handles patent infringement cases in China?
Answer: criminal

Question: What type of law handles patent infringement cases in Russia?
Answer: criminal
Intellectual_property

Copyright infringement is reproducing, distributing, displaying or performing a work, or to make derivative works, without permission from the copyright holder, which is typically a publisher or other business representing or assigned by the work's creator. It is often called "piracy". While copyright is created the instance a work is fixed, generally the copyright holder can only get money damages if the owner registers the copyright.[citation needed] Enforcement of copyright is generally the responsibility of the copyright holder. The ACTA trade agreement, signed in May 2011 by the United States, Japan, Switzerland, and the EU, and which has not entered into force, requires that its parties add criminal penalties, including incarceration and fines, for copyright and trademark infringement, and obligated the parties to active police for infringement. There are limitations and exceptions to copyright, allowing limited use of copyrighted works, which does not constitute infringement. Examples of such doctrines are the fair use and fair dealing doctrine.

Question: When was the ACTA trade agreement signed?
Answer: May 2011

Question: Which countries signed ACTA?
Answer: United States, Japan, Switzerland, and the EU

Question: Which doctrines allow limited use of copyrighted works?
Answer: fair use and fair dealing

Question: What is the common term for copyright infringement?
Answer: piracy
Intellectual_property

Trademark infringement occurs when one party uses a trademark that is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark owned by another party, in relation to products or services which are identical or similar to the products or services of the other party. In many countries, a trademark receives protection without registration, but registering a trademark provides legal advantages for enforcement. Infringement can be addressed by civil litigation and, in several jurisdictions, under criminal law.

Question: What occurs when someone uses a trademark that is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark owned by someone else?
Answer: Trademark infringement

Question: What does registering a trademark provide?
Answer: legal advantages for enforcement

Question: Where is a trademark protected without registration?
Answer: In many countries

Question: How is trademark infringement addressed in most jurisdictions?
Answer: civil litigation

Question: How is trademark infringement addressed in a few jurisdictions?
Answer: criminal law
Intellectual_property

Trade secret misappropriation is different from violations of other intellectual property laws, since by definition trade secrets are secret, while patents and registered copyrights and trademarks are publicly available. In the United States, trade secrets are protected under state law, and states have nearly universally adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. The United States also has federal law in the form of the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 (18 U.S.C. §§ 1831–1839), which makes the theft or misappropriation of a trade secret a federal crime. This law contains two provisions criminalizing two sorts of activity. The first, 18 U.S.C. § 1831(a), criminalizes the theft of trade secrets to benefit foreign powers. The second, 18 U.S.C. § 1832, criminalizes their theft for commercial or economic purposes. (The statutory penalties are different for the two offenses.) In Commonwealth common law jurisdictions, confidentiality and trade secrets are regarded as an equitable right rather than a property right but penalties for theft are roughly the same as the United States.[citation needed]

Question: Which type of intellectual property is secret?
Answer: trade secrets

Question: What law do most US states use to protect trade secrets?
Answer: Uniform Trade Secrets Act

Question: What US federal law protects trade secrets?
Answer: Economic Espionage Act

Question: Commonwealth common law regards trade secrets as what kind of right?
Answer: an equitable right

Question: US law regards trade secrets as what kind of right?
Answer: a property right
Intellectual_property

Criticism of the term intellectual property ranges from discussing its vagueness and abstract overreach to direct contention to the semantic validity of using words like property and rights in fashions that contradict practice and law. Many detractors think this term specially serves the doctrinal agenda of parties opposing reform in the public interest or otherwise abusing related legislations; and that it disallows intelligent discussion about specific and often unrelated aspects of copyright, patents, trademarks, etc.

Question: Which term is criticized as vague?
Answer: intellectual property

Question: What does the term 'intellectual property' disallow intelligent discussion about?
Answer: specific and often unrelated aspects of copyright, patents, trademarks, etc.

Question: Critics criticize what type of validity of the term 'intellectual property'?
Answer: semantic

Question: Which term is criticized as having abstract overreach?
Answer: intellectual property
Intellectual_property

Free Software Foundation founder Richard Stallman argues that, although the term intellectual property is in wide use, it should be rejected altogether, because it "systematically distorts and confuses these issues, and its use was and is promoted by those who gain from this confusion". He claims that the term "operates as a catch-all to lump together disparate laws [which] originated separately, evolved differently, cover different activities, have different rules, and raise different public policy issues" and that it creates a "bias" by confusing these monopolies with ownership of limited physical things, likening them to "property rights". Stallman advocates referring to copyrights, patents and trademarks in the singular and warns against abstracting disparate laws into a collective term.

Question: Who founded the Free Software Foundation?
Answer: Richard Stallman

Question: Who said the term 'intellectual property' should be rejected altogether?
Answer: Richard Stallman

Question: Who said the term 'intellectual property' "operates as a catch-all"?
Answer: Richard Stallman

Question: How does Stallman advocate referring to copyrights, patents, and trademarks?
Answer: in the singular
Intellectual_property

On the assumption that intellectual property rights are actual rights Stallman argues that this claim does not live to the historical intentions behind these laws, which in the case of copyright served as a censorship system, and later on, a regulatory model for the printing press that may have benefited authors incidentally, but never interfered with the freedom of average readers. Still referring to copyright, he cites legal literature such as the United States Constitution and case law to demonstrate that it is meant to be an optional and experimental bargain that temporarily trades property rights and free speech for public, not private, benefit in the form of increased artistic production and knowledge. He mentions that "if copyright were a natural right nothing could justify terminating this right after a certain period of time".

Question: Stallman thinks what type of IP historically served as a censorship system?
Answer: copyright

Question: What does Stallman think copyright served as a regulatory model for?
Answer: the printing press

Question: What does Stallman think was meant to be optional and experimental?
Answer: copyright

Question: What does Stallman think copyright was supposed to trade temporarily for public benefit?
Answer: property rights and free speech

Question: Who pointed out that "if copyright were a natural right nothing could justify terminating this right after a certain period of time"?
Answer: Stallman
Intellectual_property

Law professor, writer and political activist Lawrence Lessig, along with many other copyleft and free software activists, has criticized the implied analogy with physical property (like land or an automobile). They argue such an analogy fails because physical property is generally rivalrous while intellectual works are non-rivalrous (that is, if one makes a copy of a work, the enjoyment of the copy does not prevent enjoyment of the original). Other arguments along these lines claim that unlike the situation with tangible property, there is no natural scarcity of a particular idea or information: once it exists at all, it can be re-used and duplicated indefinitely without such re-use diminishing the original. Stephan Kinsella has objected to intellectual property on the grounds that the word "property" implies scarcity, which may not be applicable to ideas.

Question: Who is one advocate of copyleft?
Answer: Lawrence Lessig

Question: Who has objected to the idea of IP because "property" implies scarcity?
Answer: Stephan Kinsella

Question: Having no natural scarcity makes IP different from what kind of property?
Answer: tangible

Question: How much can IP be duplicated without diminishing the original?
Answer: indefinitely
Intellectual_property

Some critics of intellectual property, such as those in the free culture movement, point at intellectual monopolies as harming health (in the case of pharmaceutical patents), preventing progress, and benefiting concentrated interests to the detriment of the masses, and argue that the public interest is harmed by ever-expansive monopolies in the form of copyright extensions, software patents, and business method patents. More recently scientists and engineers are expressing concern that patent thickets are undermining technological development even in high-tech fields like nanotechnology.

Question: What can be harmed by pharmaceutical patents?
Answer: health

Question: IP benefits concentrated interests to whose detriment?
Answer: the masses

Question: Whose interests are harmed by expanding IP?
Answer: the public

Question: Developments in nanotechnology are being undermined by what type of IP?
Answer: patent

Question: What type of monopolies does IP create?
Answer: intellectual
Intellectual_property

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) recognizes that conflicts may exist between the respect for and implementation of current intellectual property systems and other human rights. In 2001 the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights issued a document called "Human rights and intellectual property" that argued that intellectual property tends to be governed by economic goals when it should be viewed primarily as a social product; in order to serve human well-being, intellectual property systems must respect and conform to human rights laws. According to the Committee, when systems fail to do so they risk infringing upon the human right to food and health, and to cultural participation and scientific benefits. In 2004 the General Assembly of WIPO adopted The Geneva Declaration on the Future of the World Intellectual Property Organization which argues that WIPO should "focus more on the needs of developing countries, and to view IP as one of many tools for development—not as an end in itself".

Question: Who recognizes that conflicts may exist between IP and other human rights?
Answer: World Intellectual Property Organization

Question: When was a document called "Human rights and intellectual property" issued?
Answer: 2001

Question: Who issued a document called "Human rights and intellectual property"?
Answer: the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Question: Who said IP failures may infringe on human rights to food and health?
Answer: the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Question: When did the WIPO adopt 'The Geneva Declaration on the Future of the World Intellectual Property Organization'?
Answer: 2004
Intellectual_property

Further along these lines, The ethical problems brought up by IP rights are most pertinent when it is socially valuable goods like life-saving medicines are given IP protection. While the application of IP rights can allow companies to charge higher than the marginal cost of production in order to recoup the costs of research and development, the price may exclude from the market anyone who cannot afford the cost of the product, in this case a life-saving drug. "An IPR driven regime is therefore not a regime that is conductive to the investment of R&D of products that are socially valuable to predominately poor populations".:1108–9

Question: For what type of goods are IP's ethical problems most pertinent?
Answer: socially valuable

Question: What is an example of socially valuable goods?
Answer: life-saving medicines

Question: What cost does IP rights allow companies to charge higher than?
Answer: the marginal cost of production

Question: Who might a higher price exclude from the market?
Answer: anyone who cannot afford the cost of the product
Intellectual_property

Another limitation of current U.S. Intellectual Property legislation is its focus on individual and joint works; thus, copyright protection can only be obtained in 'original' works of authorship. This definition excludes any works that are the result of community creativity, for example Native American songs and stories; current legislation does not recognize the uniqueness of indigenous cultural "property" and its ever-changing nature. Simply asking native cultures to 'write down' their cultural artifacts on tangible mediums ignores their necessary orality and enforces a Western bias of the written form as more authoritative.

Question: What type of creativity is excluded from the US definition of IP?
Answer: community creativity

Question: What doesn't current US IP law recognize the uniqueness of?
Answer: indigenous cultural "property"

Question: Requiring written records enforces what kind of bias?
Answer: Western

Question: The Western bias is that what form is more authoritative?
Answer: written
Intellectual_property

Also with respect to copyright, the American film industry helped to change the social construct of intellectual property via its trade organization, the Motion Picture Association of America. In amicus briefs in important cases, in lobbying before Congress, and in its statements to the public, the MPAA has advocated strong protection of intellectual-property rights. In framing its presentations, the association has claimed that people are entitled to the property that is produced by their labor. Additionally Congress's awareness of the position of the United States as the world's largest producer of films has made it convenient to expand the conception of intellectual property. These doctrinal reforms have further strengthened the industry, lending the MPAA even more power and authority.

Question: What is the American film industry's trade organization?
Answer: Motion Picture Association of America

Question: The Motion Picture Association of America is which industry's trade organization?
Answer: film

Question: Which country is the world's largest producer of films?
Answer: United States

Question: The MPAA has advocated strong protection of what kind of rights?
Answer: intellectual-property
Intellectual_property

The growth of the Internet, and particularly distributed search engines like Kazaa and Gnutella, have represented a challenge for copyright policy. The Recording Industry Association of America, in particular, has been on the front lines of the fight against copyright infringement, which the industry calls "piracy". The industry has had victories against some services, including a highly publicized case against the file-sharing company Napster, and some people have been prosecuted for sharing files in violation of copyright. The electronic age has seen an increase in the attempt to use software-based digital rights management tools to restrict the copying and use of digitally based works. Laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act have been enacted, that use criminal law to prevent any circumvention of software used to enforce digital rights management systems. Equivalent provisions, to prevent circumvention of copyright protection have existed in EU for some time, and are being expanded in, for example, Article 6 and 7 the Copyright Directive. Other examples are Article 7 of the Software Directive of 1991 (91/250/EEC), and the Conditional Access Directive of 1998 (98/84/EEC). This can hinder legal uses, affecting public domain works, limitations and exceptions to copyright, or uses allowed by the copyright holder. Some copyleft licenses, like GNU GPL 3, are designed to counter that. Laws may permit circumvention under specific conditions like when it is necessary to achieve interoperability with the circumventor's program, or for accessibility reasons; however, distribution of circumvention tools or instructions may be illegal.

Question: What does the recording industry call piracy?
Answer: copyright infringement

Question: What type of company was Napster?
Answer: file-sharing

Question: What law enforces digital rights management systems?
Answer: Digital Millennium Copyright Act

Question: Which articles of the EU Copyright Directive address circumvention of copyright protection?
Answer: Article 6 and 7

Question: When was the Conditional Access Directive passed in the EU?
Answer: 1998
Intellectual_property

In the context of trademarks, this expansion has been driven by international efforts to harmonise the definition of "trademark", as exemplified by the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights ratified in 1994, which formalized regulations for IP rights that had been handled by common law, or not at all, in member states. Pursuant to TRIPs, any sign which is "capable of distinguishing" the products or services of one business from the products or services of another business is capable of constituting a trademark.

Question: When was the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights ratified?
Answer: 1994

Question: What type of law handled IP rights before 1994 in TRIP signatories?
Answer: common law

Question: What type of IP did the TRIP agreement harmonize the definition of?
Answer: trademark

Question: What is any sign which is capable of distinguishing one business's product from another business's?
Answer: a trademark