Home

FACULTY CONVERSATION

with Peter K. Yu

associate professor of law, director of the Intellectual Property & Communications Law Program

Editor’s note: As the campus community begins to celebrate MSU’s 150th anniversary, it is a time to celebrate our past and look toward the future. As we look toward the future, the MSU News Bulletin has asked some distinguished faculty members what they envision for their field of study by the time MSU celebrates its 200th anniversary. The MSU News Bulletin will publish these conversations during the next 18 months. The Series began Sept. 16, 2004, and featured Michael Fossel, clinical professor of medicine. (full story)

Q: Intellectual property is one of the hottest issues in the media today. So, what is intellectual property?
A: Intellectual property is a catch-all term we use to cover a wide variety of legal protection for human creations. For example, we use copyrights to protect books, movies, sound recordings and computer programs. Inventors apply for patents to protect drugs, mechanical devices and chemical products. We also have something called trademarks. They cover words like Coca-Cola or IBM and distinctive signs like the Nike “swoosh” logo.

Q: Why didn’t we hear about intellectual property often in the past?
A: That’s a very good question. Intellectual property actually has existed for a long, long time. There is even an intellectual property clause in the U.S. Constitution. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution provides Congress with the power to . . . . Okay, I’ll not get into that. I think the difference between today and, say, at MSU’s 100th anniversary, is that intellectual property has now entered into the public consciousness. It’s no longer considered a technical subject that is only of interest to inventors, technology developers, legal scholars and specialized attorneys.

Q: Let’s look into the future. What issues do you think will appear in the intellectual property debate when MSU is celebrating its bicentennial in 2055?
A: Hmm, 50 years . . . Your guess is as good as mine. Honestly, I have no idea. The exciting thing about intellectual property is that the debate keeps on changing as technologies emerge. Take copyright, for example. Right now, the hottest issue is probably peer-to-peer file sharing. Peer-to-peer technologies, however, have existed for a few years already, and file-sharing technologies will exist in very different forms 10 years from now, not to mention 50 years. I was at a telecommunications trade show in South Korea this fall. There are already many new technologies that allow people to send songs and movies to others using cellular telephones. The file-sharing debate can only become more interesting once people start sending songs and movies to others using cell-phones and Wi-Fi computers.There are other interesting issues. In the patent field, there has been a lot of discussion about human cloning and the protection of bio- and nano-technology. This discussion raises not only difficult legal and business questions, but also complex ethical and sociological issues. There is also a very intense, complex and politically sensitive debate about the protection of folklore, indigenous knowledge and traditional medicines. Just as we complain about rampant piracy in China, Thailand and Ukraine, indigenous peoples are very concerned about the misappropriation of traditional knowledge and biological resources by multinational corporations.

Q: What about legal education? I notice that the Law College has started a variety of new programs and conferences since you came here last fall. So, what do you see as the future of intellectual property education?
A: It will become more global and interdisciplinary. Today, if you want to be a successful intellectual property attorney, you must understand the global business environment and have some appreciation of foreign legal systems. To fully understand the needs and problems of your clients, you also need to have some knowledge in other disciplines, such as business management or computer science. I am convinced that, in the near future, no law school can offer comprehensive intellectual property education without the support of a major research university. The study of intellectual property has changed a lot. The field is no longer limited to lawyers, but students and practitioners in other disciplines. That is, indeed, why we created for non-lawyers a new one-year Master of Jurisprudence Program in Intellectual Property and Communications Law.