I continue to be intrigued by the possible value of thinking about IP policy issues as design issues. Here’s a related point, from Seth Godin’s blog, on marketing-as-architecture:
What does an architect do? She reinvents the very nature of what’s delivered and how it is delivered. She reimagines the inputs and outputs of the organization, as well as its story, to create an engine of revenue that grows while benefitting all sides.
The reason we hear about google and apple and jetblue and starbucks all the time is that these are poster children for re-architecting existing business models into something very different. The marketing is not slapped on. Starbucks is not Dunkin Donuts with a clever sign. If Dunkin Donuts goes out to hire a “senior marketer” and gives that person traditional senior marketer duties, not much is going to change.
In what way is policy ever distinguishable from design?
I agree with MT, but it is the rare case, I think, in which the character of a copyright or a patent has been thought of as a “design” issue.
Comments are closed.