The theoretical rationales or justifications for a system of intellectual property law can be divided into roughly four groups: utilitarianism, labor-desert theory, personality theory, and semiotic democracy. We have discussed the various ways in which these rationales can be used to explain the structure of American IP law, and also the ways in which advocates draw upon them to argue for changes to current doctrine.
            In your paper, please select one of these justifications. Pick one doctrinal feature or example from each of two of the areas we have studied (patent, copyright, and trademark) where the two justifications overlap or agree - where each one comes to the same conclusion about the state of the law - and explain why. Then, pick a second doctrinal feature or example from the two areas where the two justifications diverge or
disagree - where each one comes to a different or opposing conclusion about the state of the law - and explain why.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

It seems like youre asking for an indepth analysis of how two different theoretical justifications for intellectual property law IP law converge or diverge within specific doctrinal features or exampl... View the full answer