Personal narrative Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Personal narrative - Essay Example He wanted to study English to help with his university coursework. My motivation was more casual. I was simply interested in learning a little spoken Thai and a little about Thai culture. I wasn't interested in learning to read or to write Thai. This narrative will concentrate on the application of Cambourne's prerequisites of learning to my language exchange experience. These prerequisites, or conditions of learning, are immersion, demonstration, expectation, responsibility, approximation, employment, response and engagement. As noted by Cambourne, these conditions of learning do not exist in isolation. Rather, these conditions are intertwined. A learner's ability to approximate the target behavior, for instance, may be difficult or impossible absent immersion or demonstration. That said, the eight conditions set forth a clear analytical framework for assessing my Thai-English language exchange. Immersion refers to the depth and the comprehensiveness of the learning or literacy experience. It refers to the extent to which the learner is saturated by the learning experience. It also involves, in important ways, questions of authenticity. In my case, immersion was gravely lacking. As a result, it was difficult to approximate the modeled behavior, the spoken Thai, and my expectations were consequently diminished. My instructor was a native-speaker of Thai. He was well-educated and well-prepared for our lessons. From the point of view of immersion, however, he was my sole authentic connection to the Thai language. In the background, during our lessons at the coffee shop, there was English music playing on the radio. Everything, from menus to posters on the wall to the conversations at adjoining tables, was in English. Trying to focus on my Thai lessons was at times a distraction. It seemed external to the physical and cultural environment. In short, the lack of the immersion element affected in a significant way my total learning experience. The lack of authenticity and the lack of a broader learning exposure to the learning goals left me feeling a bit hopeless about learning to speak Thai. Demonstration: Creating Realistic and Practical Situations The second condition of learning, the demonstration prerequisite, concerns the modeling of the target behavior. This modeling may be formal or informal. My Thai instructor was rather creative in this respect. He brought magazines to our meetings and used them as teaching aids. I recall one lesson where we studied shopping and prices. He brought a clothing catalogue, a Thai silk catalogue, and a Thai cooking book as teaching aids. He handed me a worksheet in which he had typed English inquiries such as, "How much is a coke", with the Thai equivalent written alongside in English script. He modeled the correct pronunciation, made relevant grammatical distinctions, and created a salesperson-customer role-play for the clothing and silk catalogues and a waiter-customer role-play for the Thai cooking book. We took turns playing each of the roles. This was one of the most beneficial aspects of my learning experience. I was able to demonstrate what I had learned in a fairly realistic way. The context in which I was able to demonstrate my knowledge, based upon my instructor's models, was also quite practical. My instructor downplayed the theory in his presentation and modeling. As we were

Psychoanalysis-Sigmund Freud Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Psychoanalysis-Sigmund Freud - Essay Example The most interesting aspect of the theory however is that it can be applied to various concepts to give convincing explanations for phenomena, thus this paper aims at applying the theory to the fashion industry to draw various patterns to understand the human psyche in regard to the industry. To comment on the various aspects of the theory to relate them with fashion, it is important to highlight the dominant propositions of the theory. Psychoanalysis is the theory put forth by Sigmund Freud to explain the personality formation and conceptualization of the human psyche in context to their identity development as a process carved out through enculturation and socialization in the world they live in (Freud 1923). To make sense of the proposition, Freud talks about the unconscious mind, mental drives and the emerging conflict giving rise to various emotions and personality developments (Freud 1920). Since fashion is also an entity revolving around the social sphere rather being shaped by the social variables, it can also be understood in terms of shaping human identity by affecting the mind and conscious. Fashion affects the human body and mind as it relates to various social constructs manifested amongst the masses by using various tools and techniques, which will be elabo rated on in this essay. Fashion manifests the internal desires of humans, as the libido is now centered at the body of an individual, where the social constructs and the ego impulses inflict the gratification with various objects1. Freud is quoted to have said "The ego is not master in its own house." (Farquhar & Askay p 131) Freud is of the view that the unconscious mind contains the repressed pleasure seeking desires of an individual which have been subdued by the ego and the superego drives, or by the fear of castration (Freud 1923). Also, in relation to this context, it is important to discuss the libido drives which are

Slavery And Plantation In Trinidad And Tobago

Slavery And Plantation In Trinidad And Tobago Slavery and Plantations have always been linked, driven by economic objectives (Williams 1994), from the earliest period of sugarcane cultivation in the Caribbean. Despite the complexity of the events and circumstances that created this relationship, sugar growth and slavery both were booming during the relatively peaceful early years of the 18th century. The European need for sugar had been increasing, and Englands sugar demands led the pack. The British islands like TT were a mono-crop society, with few settlers growing anything but sugarcane The Business of Slavery The Triangular Trade is a term commonly used in discussions of the slave trade. Slaves would be brought from Africa to the plantations, which would send sugar and other local goods to Europe, who would in turn send goods to Africa. The goods usually sent to Africa were guns and other manufactured items because there was no industry in Africa. In the West Indian islands like TT, however, the selling of slaves was an important part of the economy. The need for more slaves was always greater than the market could provide, and the West Indian companies were opened up in the 1700s to outside trade to help provide additional slaves to colonies that produced sugar. The French encouraged this trade on their islands by exempting slaves from most import and export taxes. Life on Plantations Working Conditions: Slave Labour in Plantations the toughest season, a season of toil from sunrise to twilight, bare ankles and calves stung by cowitch, knotted muscles slashed by cane leaves that cut like straight razors, backs split open by the whip The plantation land consisted of cane-fields, provision grounds, woodland and pasture. Each planter preferred to have more than 200 acres of cane land. Provision grounds were used by the slaves to cultivate root crops, plantains and vegetables for food. The woodland provided lumber and firewood and the pasture was used for grazing cattle (Handler 1965). The cane fields had either newly planted canes or ratoons. The ratoons were new shoots growing from old cane roots which were left in the ground after a previous crop of cane was harvested. Usually a ratoon field was less productive. A typical sugar estate had factory buildings such as the mill, boiling house and curing house. Around these factory buildings there were other smaller buildings and sheds in which, blacksmiths, wheelwrights, carpenters, masons, coopers and other artisan slaves worked. There would also be a small hospital for sick slaves, and a small jail which kept slaves who were being punished. There were storage rooms for tools and supplies and sheds which sheltered livestock or stored cane trash or bagasse which was used as fuel. Not far from the factory buildings were small houses in which the European managers and supervisors lived. They were generally overseers, book-keepers, skilled craftsmen and office staff. In the biggest house lived the estate owner. The slave quarters were some distance away from the homes of the managers. A work day consisted of 15-16 hours a day, during harvest time and, could go on during harvest and milling for 16-18 per week 7 days a week and according to Stampp (1956) the slaves were given the task to prepare the land for planting. Their normal working day began before daybreak and ended after sunset. They cleared the grass and bushes by weeding and burning (children between the ages of six and ten might be active as water carriers while children between the ages of ten and twelve were organized into gangs and put to weeding). Cane holes were dug and into these cane tops were planted. As the cane grew, gangs of slaves manured the field and weeded bushes that sprang up around the cane plants. Female slaves did much of the weeding and the manuring. After 12 to 15 months the cane was now mature. The field was set afire to burn off the leaves from the cane stalks and at the same time to get rid of snakes which lived there. The field slaves, using cutlasses, then cut the cane stalks, packed them in bundles and loaded them on to ox-drawn carts which transported them to the mill. At the mill, the cane was crushed and the juice flowed through gutters to large metal containers. The cane trash was removed and stored for use as fuel for the boilers. The juice in the large containers was clarified by heating and the addition of a small quantity of lime. This clarified juice was then ladled into a copper boiler in which it was boiled. After a while, the juice from this copper boiler was ladled into a smaller boiler and was boiled again and then still further in a yet smaller boiler. By then, it had changed into sticky syrup which was allowed to cool, and then poured into wooden hogsheads standing on beams in the curing house. Through small holes at the bottom of the hogsheads, molasses seeped out and was collected in containers set below the beams. After about three weeks, the remaining syrup in the hogsheads crystallised to form sugar. The sugar remained in the hogshea ds which were later packed into ships for export to Europe. Some estates also manufactured rum by fermenting juice from the first boiling and about the same quantity of molasses. Almost all of this specialised work carried out in the manufacture of sugar and rum was done by skilled artisan slaves who were highly valued by their owners. During the milling season, slaves worked in shifts throughout the day and night. Even after the crop season was over, the estate owner did not allow his slaves to be idle. The fields had to be prepared for the new crop, weeding and manuring of the ratoons had to be done, and repairs to drainage and irrigation canals, fences and buildings had to carry out. Work was even found for children from the age of six years old. They collected firewood, cut grass to feed farm animals and fetched drinking water to slaves working in the fields. The plantation owners did not want their slaves to involve themselves in idle conversation since they felt that the discontented slaves may use the occasion to plot rebellion. Punishments While each plantation had its own set of social, religious, and labour codes, all had the basic format for an instilled hierarchy in which the slave master reigned as gad. He maintained the element of slave misery, by controlling the degree of pain (Starobin 1974). Treatments were given such as mutilation, branding, chaining, and murder which were supposedly regulated or prohibited by law. Whippings, beatings, drownings, and hangings were as unpredictable as they were gruesome. It was clear to plantation owners that slavery could not survive without the whip (even though owners were forbidden to deliberately kill or maliciously mutilate a slave). Males and females were whipped indiscriminately. The severity of whipping depended on the number of strokes to the type of whip. Fifteen to twenty lashes were generally sufficient, but they could range much higher. Other items used for punishments included stocks, chains, collars, and irons. It was also commonplace that women could be raped by the owner of the plantation, his sons or, any white male. Methods of Control The White plantation owners in TT used various methods to maintain complete control over their slaves. Their principal method was that of divide and rule. Members of the same tribe were separated on different plantations to prevent communication between them. The aim behind this was to prevent any plans to rebel if they were together. This separation, however, created a problem of communication, since the plantation would have different groups of slaves speaking different languages. Therefore, the planters had to find a way to communicate with their slaves. Soon a new language, known as Creole, developed and this became a common tongue among the slaves. When the British took control of the twin islands in the nineteenth century, English words were injected into the language and it became the basis of the Creolised language. Slaves were also prevented from practising their religions. Quite a few slaves were Muslims while many others had their own tribal beliefs. But since the Christian planters saw non-Christians as pagans, they made sure that the slaves could not gather to worship in the way they were accustomed when they lived in Africa. Later Christian missionaries were permitted on the plantations and they were allowed to preach to the slaves on Sundays. In time, many of them were converted to Christianity; it was the general feeling that the converted slaves became docile and was not willing to support rebellion on the plantations. Another means of control was the creation of a class system among the slaves. Field slaves formed the lowest group, even though some of them had special skills. The lowest ranking slaves, the backbone of the plantation economy, were the field slaves. The field slaves were divided into gangs according to their physical strength and ability, with the strongest and fittest males and females in the first gang. The incentive used to encourage hard work, was lashes of the cart whip, which were freely administered by the drivers, who were privileged slaves under the overseers supervision. Higher up the slave hierarchy were the artisan slaves such as blacksmiths, carpenters and masons, who were often hired out by the planters. These slaves also had opportunities to earn money for themselves on various occasions. Still higher up in this class system were the drivers who were specially selected by the White planters to control the other slaves. The domestic or house slave had a special place in this arrangement, and because they worked in the masters house and sometimes receiving special favours from the master, they held other slaves in contempt. Usu ally, the slaves in the lowest rung of this social ladder were the ones who rebelled and often domestic slaves were the ones who betrayed them by reporting the plots to their master. Then there were divisions based on colour. In the early days, it was relatively easy for a pure African to rise to the level of a driver. But mixtures occurred through the birth of children as a result of unions between White men and black women (mulatto), White men and mulatto women (mestee) and mulatto men and black women (sambo). Some slaves of succeeding generations thus had lighter complexions, and the White planters discriminated in favour of them. These slaves with White fathers or White relatives were placed in positions above those of the field slaves. This was the beginning of colour discrimination in the Guyanese society. Of course, in all of this, the Europeans the Whites occupied the highest rung of the social ladder and they found willing allies among the mixed or coloured population who occupied the intermediate levels. The pure Africans remained at the lowest level Women and Slavery in the Plantations According to Bush (1990; 33) the primary reason for the presence of women in TT during the time of slavery was due to their labour value. In the early days of slavery, plantation owners attempted to produce healthy patterns of reproduction and encourage marriage, but found it was economically illogical to do so. Instead, it was more profitable to purchase new slaves from Africa (until the continued supply of female slaves being delivered from across the Atlantic was threatened by abolitionist pressure in the eighteenth century). Girls worked on estates from the early age of four. Occupations for girls between the ages of 12-19 varied from field work, to stock work, to domestic work, to washing e.g. clothing, dishes, etc. ( Reddock 1985 pg. 64 ), . Other forms of work for mature women included midwife, doctoress, and housekeeper. European plantation owners generally regarded most slave women as suitable for field work, which consisted of jobs such as digging holes for canes, weeding, and hoeing. In Jamaica, the majority of women between the ages of 19 and 54 were working in the fields. By the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, there were more women working in the field than men due to their lower mortality rates. Despite the common stereotype whereby men are stronger and more physically capable than women, it can be argued that women were as important, if not more important, to field work during the period of slavery in TT. The importance of women in the plantation economy is reflected in the price of female slaves between 1790 and the end of the slave trade. The price for a new male slave was approximately  £50- £70, while the price for a new female slave was approximately  £50- £60. (Bush, 1996:33) Apart from occupations such as doctoress, midwife, and housekeeper, which were considered to be higher employment positions for slave women during the time, the slave elite was nearly entirely made up of men. Women were confined to fighting for lower positions in the socio-economic hierarchy and were always excluded from the more prestigious and skilled jobs (i.e. carpentry). Among the limited amount of occupations available to Trinbagonian slave women, the most prestigious job was found to be nursing. One way in which women slaves would occasionally amass income and resources for themselves was through sex trade (Morrissey 1989 pg. 69). This was a common way for women slaves to save money for freedom, particularly in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in TT. The majority of enslaved domestic workers in towns were expected to support themselves through prostitution. Culture of Slavery and Plantation life Home Plantation slaves were housed in slaves cabins. Small, rudely built of logs with clapboard sidings, with clay chinking. Floors were packed dirt. They were leaky and drafty and the combination of wet, dirt, and cold made them diseased environments. On the plantation, the slaves were housed in buildings which were some distance away from the masters house. Most of these slave houses had thatched roofs and walls of old boards or of wattle and mud. The floor was the earth itself and there were no furniture except some rudimentary pieces that the slaves managed to make. Clothing Slaves were not well-clothed; they had inadequate clothing for people engaged in heavy labour all year. Children would dress in long shirts. Men possessed little besides with two shirts and two cotton pants. Women were provided with an insufficient amount of cloth and made their own clothes. The cloth was cheap material, produced in England that was dubbed Negro cloth. The slaves also obtained a clothing allowance roughly every year. The men received a coarse woollen jacket, a hat, about six yards of cotton, and a piece of canvas to make a pair or two of trousers. Women received the same allowance as the men, but children received none. The children remained naked until they were about nine years old, or were given cast-off clothing that their parents managed to find or were able to purchase. Food The food was generally adequate in bulk, but imbalanced and monotonous. Typical food allowance was a peck of corn meal and three to four pounds of salt pork or bacon per week per person. This diet could be supplemented by vegetables from their gardens, by fish or wild game, and molasses (not usually). The slaves prepared their own food and carried it out to the field in buckets. While the slaves were provided with certain foodstuffs by the master, they raised their own subsistence crops of vegetables, plantains and root crops on small garden plots that the master allowed them to use. However, they could only do their personal farming on Sundays when they had no work on the plantation. They also took the opportunity to fish on Sundays in the nearby canals, the rivers or the ocean. Each adult slave was given one pound of salted cod fish every Sunday by the plantation owner. The salted cod fish was imported from North America. A child slave was given a smaller allocation. On special Chr istian holidays, there was an additional allowance of about a pound of beef or pork, some sugar and a quantity of rum. Religion The general view held by the plantation owners was that the African slaves did not hold to a system of beliefs that could be described as a religion (Mbiti 1969). At best so the members of the plantocracy and the church that served them felt their beliefs amounted to nothing more than heathenish superstition. Not a few of them, perhaps, felt that the Africans were incapable of religious sentiment. But the Africans held religious beliefs derived from their homeland. It may be useful to note that some of the slaves, particularly these who came from the Fula-speaking area of Senegambia, were Muslims. The practice of the planters of separating tribesmen from one another, and of discouraging the assembling of slaves for any purpose whatsoever, was not calculated to allow Islam to survive. Again, the small number of African Muslims that came to plantations in TT lacked the leadership of Imams and the possession of the Quran. Then, too, the plantation life did not lend itself for long pra yers at fixed times, worship on a set day, fasting at prescribed periods, or feasting on holidays which did not coincide with those observed by the plantocracy. On the other hand, indigenous African religious beliefs, which became labelled as obeah, survived the difficulties of estate life. But these beliefs underwent significant changes although they remained clearly African in structure (Saraceni 1996). Three factors were mainly responsible for these changes. In the first place, African religious ideas were capable of modification in response to the new circumstance of estate life. Secondly, the practice of African religion was frowned upon by estate authorities. This meant that the religion could only be practised secretly and irregularly. The result has been that some aspects of African religious practices withered away while others lost their nationality and language and became garbled. Thirdly, the exposure to Christianity led not only to the conversion of Blacks to that religion, but also to the overlapping of African and Christian beliefs. Free Time Except for earnings enjoyed by the artisan slaves, most of the slaves depended on obtaining money by selling surplus produce from their provision grounds and also the sale of livestock that they reared. On Sundays, village markets were held and the slaves seized the opportunity to barter or sell their produce. On these occasions the slaves made purchases of a few pieces of clothing and other items for their homes. The Sunday markets were also occasions when slaves from different plantations were able to socialise and to exchange news and pieces of gossip. There were also times of recreation. These were usually at the end of the crop and at Christmas and on public holidays when the slaves were allowed to hold dances which had to end by midnight.

The Importance of Light in A Streetcar Named Desire :: A Streetcar Named Desire Essays

This paper will discuss the use of light in the play, "A Streetcar Named Desire", by Tennessee Williams. Blanche’s relation to light is quite obvious because she tries to avoid bright light of any kind. Her reaction to light can be regarded as an attempt to hide her true nature as well as her vanishing beauty and youth. By hiding from the light, she tries to escape reality. She covers the naked light bulb with a Chinese paper lantern, saying, â€Å"I can’t stand a naked light bulb, any more than I can a rude remark or a vulgar action† (Sc.3 p. 2093). This remark shows that Blanche would rather hide behind polite phrases than accept truth and reality. The paper lantern is not very stable, though, and it can easily be destroyed, just like her illusions. In scene six, she takes Mitch home with her and says, â€Å"Let’s leave the lights off† (Sc.6 p. 2309). Blanche thinks of Mitch as a future husband, and therefore she does not want him to know her past or her true age, and the best way to hide her age is to stay out of bright light where he could possibly see her wrinkles and fading youth in her face. Later in that scene, Blanche tells Mitch about her husband Allan: â€Å"When I was sixteen, I made the discovery – love. All at once and much, much too completely. It was like you suddenly turned a blinding light on something that had always been half in shadow, that’s how it struck the world for me† (Sc. 6 p. 2113). In her past, light used to represent love, but now it represents something destructive for her. Allan’s suicide erases the light or love, and thus she now does not believe in it any longer and tries to escape from the light and therefore escape reality. When Mitch tears off the paper lantern in order to take a closer look at her in the bright light, â€Å"she utters a frightened gasp† (Sc. 9 p. 2125). Then she tells him, â€Å"I don’t want realism. I want magic! Yes, yes, magic! I try to give that to people. I misrepresent things to them. I don’t tell truth, I tell what ought to be truth.

How Successfully Does Marlowe portrayal of Faustus Essay

How Successfully Does Marlowe portrayal of Faustus reflect the attitudes and beliefs of Elizabethan times? Christopher Marlowe lived in a time of great change for England and the whole of Europe. New developments in the field of science were overturning ancient ideas about astronomy and physics and the discovery of the Americas had transformed the European views of the world. Christian and pagan beliefs interacted with each other in rich and often illogical ways, and signs of that complicated interaction are present in many of Marlowe’s works. We see the idea’s of Renaissance Europe through Dr Faustus in Dr Faustus. Doctor Faustus is a play of deep questions concerning morality, religion, and man’s relationship to both. Sorcery and magic were part of widespread belief systems throughout Europe that predated Christianity. These early beliefs about magic were present in medicine. Women in particular used a mix of magic and herbal medicine to treat common illnesses. But as Christianity spread and either absorbed or rejected other belief systems, practitioners of magic came to be viewed as evil. These themes are presented in Doctor Faustus especially the idea of religion. Many religious themes base don Elizabethan views are presented in the play. Pride is one of the Seven Deadly Sins, arguably the one that leads to all the others. Faustus’ first great sin is pride and he does not stop there. Reflecting the Elizabethean view, pride gives rise to all of the other sins, and ends ironically with the sinner’s downfall. This is clearly shown in Faustus. Dr. Faustus is a man possessed by himself, and blinded by his own intellect. By making a deal with the devil, Faustus trades his soul for satisfaction, and a greater field of study. He is selfish–wanting knowledge, power, and fun without having to work or take responsibility for it. As result of his selfish desires, he signs a contract with his blood trading his soul for his desires, eternal peace for eternal anguish, thus beginning his hardships which leads to him committing the other 6 sins becoming increasingly petty and low. Like Christian belief that it is Pride which lead for the Devil to be exiled from heaven, it to is behind Faustus’ downfall. Elizabethans had a strong view on hell. Hell was developed throughout the Medieval and Tudor times by the church to scare the ordinary people. It was widely believed that Hell is eternal, but so is heaven. For a Christian, all that is necessary to be saved from eternal damnation is acceptance of Jesus Christ’s grace. This belief can be shown in Faustus as early as Scence 3 where Faustus signs away his soul. Even after signing away his soul to the devil, Faustus has the option of repentance that will save him from hell. But once he has committed himself to his own damnation, Faustus seems unable to change his course. This of course leads to his damnation in the last Act. The play emphasizes the idea that if you turn away from God you will be damned. The play also however gives a different idea of what hell is. It was believed at the time that hell was a place and images of fire etc were widely used to show what it looked like. Marlow however gives us the view that it is just separation from God that is Hell. This is shown through Metatopholis in Act 1 Sc 3 when Faustus asks him how come he has left Hell. The idea of of a time of discovery took off in a major way when Dr Faustus was being written. Amrlow makes several references to this idea throughout the play. New lands were discovered by explorers like Christopher Columbus. A great deal of enthusiasm and optimism was generated by the fact that the world had quite literally become a much bigger place. When Fautus talks about what he wishes to do with his power in Act 1 Sc 1 Line 83 Fautus declares he intends to send spirits to â€Å"search all corners of the new-found world.† He also sends Met. To the other side of the world to fetch the Duchess some grapes in Act 4. This shows that like the scholars at the time Faustus to ahs an interest in exploration and discovery. Fautus also has an interest in expanding his knowledge. At the beginning of the book Fautus is alking to himself about what knowledge he wishes to have. He rejects a range of preoffessions including that of a Physican and lawyer. These professions were at the time seen as the â€Å"magicians† of their time. They were the well-educated people and at the time these people were behind the new ideas and the first stirrings of the scientific revolution. Copernicus proposed that the earth was in motion and orbited the sun, opposing all previous thinking on the subject. In Dr. Fautus in Act 2 Sc 3 Met. Tells Fautus the Renaissance view on the Universe. Marlowe was probably agreeing with them hence why he out it into his play. The idea of Faustus rejecting the profession he lists in Act 1 Sc 1 symbolizes the Elizabethan break with the medieval world, which prized authority above all else, in favor of a more modern spirit of free inquiry, in which experimentation and innovation trump the assertions of Greek philosophers and the Bible. Elizabethans believed they could achieve above what was realistically possible. This is verified in the introduction to Scene 1, where the story of Icarus is told. The story shows the consequences of over-ambition, and tells you what will happen to Faustus. Scene 1 also shows the Elizabethan need for extravagance, money and fame, lines 14-15 show how Faustus wants gold, and to be immortalized Alchemy was a complex of beliefs and ideas that involved chemistry, astrology and magic, with the scope to blend in ideas drawn from various religions. Magic was a theme that was explored in various plays at the Elizabethean time. Shakespeare was fascinated by magic and this is evident from his plays such as, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Hamlet and Macbeth. In his play Dr Faustus, Marlowe warns us of the dark power inherent in magic. Faustus sells his soul to the devil in return for knowledge and worldly success but his dream is eventually shattered. For Marlowe magic is a downright dangerous practise. He was here expressing the common belief that unlike the good magic praticsed by scholars and physicans Black magic was a dangerous place to go and that the occult could lead to a life of damnation. Throughout the play Faustus shows a keen interest in the occult In the opening of Act 1 Scene 3 we the audience see Faustus conjuring a devil. In Elizabethan times spells, folklore, superstition were a normal part of life. This is shown in Line 7-‘Seeing thou hast prayed and sacrificed to them’, where Faustus prepares for his conjuring act. It is ironic that he prays, as he does not believe in God. Following this ritual, he draws a circle around himself, to keep evil spirits from harming him. This is ironic once more, as he is conjuring the devil at the same time- who is surely the most evil spirit possible. The entire conjuring scene is set to challenge religion, as many Elizabethans did. This may have been because the religion is England at the time was very unstable and Elizabethan’s had to compel to what ever religion the law enforced on them. It is not just the Renaissance period Faustus highlights in his play. He also wrote a play he knew would appeal to his audience. The use of slapstick comedy in the play during such scene as making a mockery of the pope and his head falling off would have appealed to the lower uneducated class masses that he would have expected to view his plays. He wrote a simple humor for simple people to understand.

Copyright Law and Industrial Design Essay

Introduction The history of intellectual property law represents, in its essence a bargain between the interests of society from being able to utilize and copy innovations, and literary and artistic works, and the interest in protecting the benefit to the creator so as to stimulate further such work. Enactment of copyright legislation was not based upon any natural right that the author has upon his writings but upon the ground that the welfare of the public will be better served by securing to authors for limited periods the exclusive rights to their writings. Property rights represent the principal vehicle for enabling creators and producers to appropriate the value of their efforts. Preserving a delicate balance therefore, is of paramount importance. However, intellectual property rights have, in certain circumstances, begun to overlap and provide simultaneous or sequential protection for some inventive and creative works mainly by accretion rather than design. The traditional channeling doctrines used to determine which area protects a certain interest have had their boundaries blurred, and overlapping areas has become a phenomenon, its most prominent manifestation being the overlap of protection afforded to designs under the design laws and the copyright laws. This paper, by tracing the source and genesis of the rights afforded to industrial designs, the varying nature of the protection afforded and the rationale behind it, will attempt to argue that the conceptual separation between the protectability of copyrightable works and designs necessitates a very strict exclusion of all designs or applied art to be removed from the ambit of copyright protection. By clearing up the confusion surrounding the law of development of designs and the ambiguous nature of the protection afforded which has led to the current status of overlapping protection, the paper will present an overview of its implications and defend status quo. The Origin of Design and Copyright Stemming from the age old understanding of property rights and the entitlements carved thereto, the very basis of copyright law is to allow the creator of a work the right to enjoy the fruits of his labour and derive benefit from it. The concept of limitation, however is inherent in it, and it has been universally held that the author / artist of a work cannot enjoy the monopoly forever. This concept of a limited right is of grave importance in this paper, since the development of various strands of law is crucially linked to its limitation. Copyright law then, evolved to bestow upon the creator the right to distribute, to perform, display and to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work and prohibit all unauthorized, economically significant uses of copyrighted works. Copyright law has traditionally had a ‘useful article’ exception. According to the legislative history of the 1976 Copyright Act, the purpose of excluding useful articles from copyright protection was â€Å"to draw as clear a line as possible between copyrightable works of applied art and uncopyrightable works of industrial design.† The objective of excluding useful articles was fundamentally linked to the nature of copyright itself, which protected art for art’s sake, the mere expression. The distinctive philosophy of copyright law protection applied only to art, where the sole purpose of the art was its aesthetic value and was extended only gradually, and against considerable opposition, to ‘works of art applied to industry.’ The separation of ‘beauty’ from ‘utility’ was opposed on the ground that art remained art even when applied to useful objects. But the fundamental object of the design being economic aims, it only came into its own when the industrial revolution had made it possible to reproduce useful articles in series and which then assumed the eminently practical task of increasing sales of goods on the general products market. Industrial design, made for a commercial purpose, did not qualify and were always disqualified from the wide ambit of copyright protection. It was considered appropriate to treat artistic works applied to products produced in certain industries separately from other works which enjoyed full copyright protection. For the simple reason of being applied art, being embodied in a useful article and necessitating a different approach, design law evolved from copyright as an exception for artistic designs applied to specific classes of industrial goods, or goods within particular industries. In obtaining protection, the design had to satisfy the requirements of novelty, non obviousness and creativity. Essentially given as a right to protect fabric designs, the extent of protection grew until was no requirement for registration. Now, according to the Industrial Design Act, a â€Å"’design† or an ‘industrial design’ means features of shape, configuration, pattern or ornament and any combination of those features that, in a finished article, appeal to and are judged solely by the eye. A registered design is a statutory monopoly, of up to 25 years duration, which is intended to give protection to the aesthetic appearance, but not the function, of the whole or parts of a manufactured article. The visual impact or impression counts. The design may be applied to any of the surfaces of the article and hence, it may be the shape or surface decoration. It is the design, not the article itself which is protected by registration. Surface designs were two dimensional designs and were mostly just achieved by ornamentation and the like, and when the design involved shape and structure changes in the article, they were shape designs. To be qualified for registration, a representation of the design, a statement of novelty identifying its unique features, and the set of articles in respect of which monopoly is claimed was required to be submitted. The required level of originality for a design to qualify is disputed. While in some cases, it is only required that the design not be in existence, in other cases, creativity and aesthetic appeal was required. It would seem, however, that the latter requirement more truly reflects the incidents of the law, since the separability analysis requires that decorative features be identifiable. Design Protection: Its Rationale and Incidents Design protection law, from its very inception, attempted to provide a monopoly status to the design only with respect to a specified category of articles, and not to every object which might utilize the design. This deviation is highly significant for the purpose of this analysis, since it exemplifies one of the most fundamental distinctions between the law of design protection and copyright. From affording protection only to ornamentation of designs, the Act started to cover a new and original design for an article of manufacture having reference to some purpose of utility. The reference to ‘utiltity’ whether as an exclusionary or determinative factor in deciding legal protection for the design, play a pivotal role in the development of design law and thus, its relation and dependence upon the functional aspect of the article could not be divorced. The result of design protection to manufactured articles therefore, may be to secure important advantages in reference to a mechanical object, if these advantages should be the result directly or indirectly of the shape adopted. It is in this context that the separability analysis acquires significance. Doctrine of Separability: Unity of Art and Theory of Disocciation The mere expression of the design as an artistic work would receive protection under copyright, but where the article embodying the design did not have the sole purpose of being of aesthetic appeal alone, it became a design. Thus, only that aspect of a design which could be separated from the utilitarian aspect of the article would receive protection, otherwise the aesthetic appeal of a useful article would go unnoticed since the functionality doctrine negates the aims of copyright law. Design law protected any feature of the design which was dictated entirely by the dictates of functionality would not receive protection, since it was the creative nature of the design which was sought to be protected, and not the entire article. The unity of art theory asserts that industrial art is art; the theory of dissociation starts from the premise that industrial art is inextricably bound up with industrial products. The unity of art doctrine glossed over the affinity of ornamental designs of useful articles to industrial property, an affinity recognized by the Paris Union at the International Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property in 1883. The doctrine of separability, as developed in the context of copyright law is of great significance in this analysis. According to this, protection is afforded only to that part of the design which is separable from the utilitarian aspects of the article. When the shape of an article is dictated by, or is necessarily responsive to, the requirements of its utilitarian function, or if the sole intrinsic function of an article is its utility, the fact that it is unique and attractively shaped will not qualify it as a work of art, but if the same functionality is capable of being obtained from a different design, the design is eligible for protection. The notion that the shape of an article dictated by the requirements of its utilitarian function, should not be protectible in copyright law is accepted nearly everywhere because such protection would circumvent the strict requirements of the patent law. If there is no physical separability, the examination then moves on to whether the utilitarian and aesthetic features can be imagined separately and independently from the useful article without destroying the basic shape of the useful article. Of course, all industrial designs are â€Å"functional† in the sense that they are embodied in products that perform a function. As a matter of practical reality the design will be inexorably and intimately related to the product. The separable analysis, while useful to distinguish the actual design sought to be ornamented, cannot denigrate from the fact that the design, is meant for a specified article, and hence the protection affordable to it is intricately connected to the factum of it being embodied in an article. The Overlap Its genesis and treatment The Indian Copyright Act provides for exclusion of designs which are registrable under the Designs Act. S. 15 excludes the application of the Act to all designs registered under the Designs Act and S 15(2) states that: (2) Copyright in any design, which is capable of being registered under the Designs Act, 1911, but which has not been so registered, shall cease as soon as any article to which the design has been applied has been reproduced more than fifty times by an industrial process by the owner of the copyright or, with his license, by any other person. The overlap between copyright and design protection which has caused so much confusion is intricately connected to the very nature of the rights afforded under each. The 1911 Act in the UK provided that all designs capable of being registered would be deprived of copyright. A design capable of registration, continued to have copyright protection, until the article using the design had been reproduced more than fifty times by an industrial purpose, at which point, only the protection affordable under the Registered Designs Act was applicable. However, this did include prints, which could not, rationally be said to not constitute an artistic work and hence, case law had to specify that the exclusionary clause did not include artistic works and prints. S. 52 of the CDPA, reproducing this notion is indicative of the tendency of the law to determine extent of protection based on whether or not the design was to be mass produced in a class of articles. It has also caused considerable confusion, especially with respect to whether, if an artistic design, meant solely as such, and hence eligible for copyright protection, but later reproduced in an article, would suffer the exclusions, or whether, its objective elements rendering it capable of being used in an article would bring it under the rubric of the exclusion. The scope of the design to be mass produced thus, played a great role in determining what protection it become eligible for, whether copyright or design, the latter more alike to patent protection. The point at which an object became ‘commercialised’, and part of industry, the terms and nature of intellectual property accorded to it changes. The main rationale of this exclusion was to limit the protection afforded under the copyrights subsisting in the design to the exact period of time design registration would have subsisted, and only those rights. A comparison of this development of the law with the law of patent reveals a similarity. While copyright subsisting in literary or artistic works, where the form of expression is sought to be protected for a term of life plus 50 years, articles which have utility attached to them, such as patentable innovations, receive protection for a shorter time limit, since the functional aspect of the article requires that monopolistic privileges be removed as soon as possible. In the development of design law therefore, a trend can be noticed. As long as a design was just that, an expression, copyright protection existed. Its materialization in a functional article created by an industrial process, reduced the term of monopolistic privileges granted to its creator. Thus, even if the protection was to the artistic design, its relation to the product cannot be divorced. A compromise The controversy surrounding the overlap between copyright and design protection and the issues within it stem from a basic confusion of the objectives behind both types of laws. Copyright law seeks to achieve the double objective of widest possible production and dissemination of original creative works and at the same time, allow others to draw on these works in their own creative and educational activities, through a scheme of carefully balanced property rights that still manages to give the authors and producers sufficient inducements to produce such work. The balance that copyright law seeks to achieve is based on a judgment about social benefit. To give greater property rights than are needed to obtain the desired quantity and quality of works would impose costs on users without any countervailing benefit to society. Concurrently, allowing one form of protection to expire, only for the article to claim protection under another regime would be a colourable devise to achieve the same object, a roundabout way to receive more protection that intended. It is for that reason that designs have to be clearly excluded from copyright law and the utilitarian theory seeks a middle ground between absolute ownership of intellectual property and none whatsoever. Over Protection or Under Protection? The duality of art hypothesis that ornamental designs were normally ineligible for copyright protection because their dependence on useful articles made them primarily objects of commerce and deprived them of the independent existence deemed a basic attribute of true works of art. The distinctive philosophy of protection that characterizes copyright traditionally protected only art, where the sole purpose of the art was its aesthetic value and was extended only gradually, and against considerable opposition, to ‘works of art applied to industry.’ The separation of ‘beauty’ from ‘utility’ was opposed on the ground that art remained art even when applied to useful objects. But the fundamental object of the design being economic aims, it only came into its own when the industrial revolution had made it possible to reproduce useful articles in series and which then assumed the eminently practical task of increasing sales of goods on the general prod ucts market. The industrial design is often seen as an analogue of the utility patent owing to its effects on commerce, and its legal status has been influenced to a certain degree by the characteristic principles of industrial property law. The very insistence on the seperability doctrine to afford protection to the design, reveals the importance of the utilitarian aspects in the paradigm of design law despite the repeated attempts to focus on the separable, aesthetic aspects of it. The consequence of this ‘functional’ aspect of industrial articles qualifying for industrial design protection is the limited term of protection afforded to it. No modern designer ignores the function of the article he shapes. Since the chief objective of those designs is industrial and commercial exploitation, the chief characteristic of designs and models, makes the Copyright Law hard to apply. The parallel tracks of design law and patent law cannot be avoided. The Copyright office of the U.S, until 1949, refused to give copyright protection to three dimensional shapes because it would come within the category of multiple commercial productions of applied arts, which, they held was only eligible for patent protection and resorting to the less stringent requirements of copyright went against that. The flexible treatment to improvements under patent law is not afforded to designs, and hence, the scope of innovation is restricted. Narrow scope of protection is necessary to avoid protecting style trends of which the protected design is a part. The indefinable relation between the art and its application means that copyright protection will end up removing much more than the expression, and also some forms of its application, which upsets the traditional bargain in intellectual property law. The Economic Ripple Traditionally, the right to copyright protection is premised on a claim that certain industrial designs are entitled to legal recognition as art in the historical sense. The economic repercussions of such recognition flow principally from the industrial character of the material support in which ornamental designs are embodied. The incidence of these repercussions upon any given system varies with the extent to which the claim to recognition as art is itself given effect. As copyright protection for designs of useful articles expands, the economic effects of this expansion on the general products market are counterproductive. This is just one of the effects. In general, overprotection results from the progressive monopolization of ever smaller aggregates of inventive activity, which elevate social costs in return for no clearly equilibrated social benefits. But the rescue of artistic of designs from the exigencies of patent law, were now converting copyright law into a de facto industrial property law without the characteristic safeguards of the industrial property paradigm. A significant effect of awarding copyright protection thus is the economic effect. An analogy from the law of patent proves this point. Patent doctrines such as the rule of blocking patents and the reverse doctrine of equivalents offer some protection to the developers of significant or radical improvements who can thereby allocate gains from their invention. Copyright doctrine however, extends to cover any â€Å"copy† or adaptation or alteration of the original that is nonetheless â€Å"substantially similar† to the original work. An important difference between copyright and registered designs is that the latter can be enforced against a third party who has not copied the proprietors design. The exclusive right conferred for designs was in the nature of a monopoly right, which means that it was infringed by another party who employed that design or one not substantially different from it, regardless of whether that other party copied from the owner or created his own registered design independently. The right is thus fundamentally different from unregistered design right and copyright for both of which copying is an essential ingredient for infringement. The fair – use exception which arises when a person uses copyrighted expression in a way that the law deems to be fair is indeterminate, and this characteristic of design law makes it even more difficult to apply it. Dynamic societies need small improvements and massive breakthroughs in art and technology to prosper. Yet it is difficult to develop incentives that can spur the less dramatic type of creativity without imposing crippling costs. For instance, subtle innovations usually generate small benefits that are exceeded even by the mere cost of administering a property rule. In addition, the margin of error for protecting these improvements is slim because their life span is so short. Esthetic designs and other marginal improvements, by contrast, have an optimal term of only a matter of months and a mistake that gives an additional six months of protection to designs creates a much greater distortion in the incentives for developing commercial art which is not the case in copyright. Conclusion The availability of overlapping intellectual property protection in all of its forms presents a serious threat to the goals and purposes of federal intellectual property policy and must be addressed as a single issue. The 1842 act, instead of re defining designs to prevent overlap, the definition was left broad but was subject to an express exclusion of all designs covered by the other Acts thereby necessitating interpretation of two acts, set a pattern carried through to the present day. The true scope and effectiveness of design law will depend on the extent to which the scope of protection it affords which is undermined by the concurrent availability of copyright protection for industrial art. If a country makes it easy for industrial art to qualify for copyright protection as applied art, designers will have less incentive to make use of a special design law and design protection will increasingly be characterized by the copyright approach, the harmful effects of which have been proved. Design laws, therefore, have to be structured so that obtaining copyright protection is difficult and most designs fall within their jurisdictional sweep. The legal history of industrial art in the twentieth century is an effort to establish special regimes of design protection without unduly derogating from the general principles of copyright law and laws should be structured that way. One should not forget that this theory was spawned by a false conflict between art and industry. By fighting for the artistic value of a shape, one has supposedly justified drawing into the orbit of copyright law a body of intellectual products that bear only an apparent resemblance to the creations covered by this regime. The evidence is persuasive that the costs of a property right outweigh the benefits. That judgment is reinforced by the observation that, notwithstanding the lack of protection afforded to commercial art, consumers already have an incredibly diverse selection of product designs from which to choose. The difficulties of interpretation caused by exclusions to exclusions to exclusion seem to be endemic to industrial design law, and the problem of overlap therefore has to be treated differently. Bibliography Books: P. Goldstein, Copyright (2nd edn., Vol 1.New York: Aspen Law and Business 2002). S. P. Ladas, Patents, Trademarks and Related Rights: National and International Protection (Harvard: Harvard University Press 1975). Laddie, Prescott, Vitoria, The Modern Law of Copyrights and Designs (3rd ed., Vol. 2, London: Butterworths 2000). B. L. Wadhera, Law Relating to Patents, Trademarks, Copyright, Designs and Geographical Indications (New Delhi: Universal Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd 2004) M. Howe, Q.C, Russell, Clarke and Howe on Industrial Designs (7th edn., London: Sweet and Maxwell 2005). Articles: V.R. Moffat, â€Å"Mutant Copyrights and Backdoor Patents: The Problem of Overlapping Intellectual Protection† 19 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 1473 (2004). The article deals in great detail about the problems of overlapping intellectual property right protection. Beginning with an analysis of the process involved in affording protection to any intellectual property, the article describes the bargain that is struck between the society and the inventor / creator, for the better good of all, since providing protection incentivizes and after a certain period of time, the invention / creation is required to be relegated to public use in return for the subsisting monopoly. The article then describes how the problem of overlapping protection, how it is more be accretion rather than by design, helped along by the judiciary, the insidious influence of ever increasing demands, and goes on to characterize the problem of overlap, and suggests ways to stop it. P.K Schalestock, â€Å"Forms of Redress for Design Piracy: How Victims can use existing Copyright Law† 21 Seattle University Law Review 113 (1997). The article looks at the various forms of protection available to the designers of clothes, since the current framework of copyright laws in the U.S, outlaws all forms of protection for useful articles. The design of clothes could only be protectable so far as that design was seperable from the functional aspect of clothes, which, as the author proceeds to argue is an impossible task since clothese were inherently meant to be useful but the cut, shape and colour greatly contributed to its value as well. The author, reviewing design piracy in the clothing industry, explains how the advancement of technology has made this all the more worse. He points out how the existing framework fails to provide a remedy, and then provides suggestions and remedies whereby this lacunae in the law could be remedied. M.C. Broaddus, â€Å"Designers Should Strive to Create ‘Useless’ Products: Using the Useful Article Doctrine to Avoid Separability Analysis† 51 South Texas Law Review 493 (2009). The article deals in detail with the irony of the inability of intellectual property law to afford protection to useful articles. It deals in detail with the evolution of the separability doctrine, its variants, and the judicial treatment of the same. It starts with a brief description of the history of the development of the law of industrial designs, the lacunae that existed previously due to the refusal of copyright law to recognize the applied art in industrial articles, and the need for protection of the art in those articles nevertheless. It discusses cases in which the separability has been in question and shows how, judicial discretion in having to make this distinction is actually leading to the judiciary making decisions about what constitutes art and what does not. Hence, the article suggests some differential means of analysis to avoid this confusion. A. Muhlstein, M.A. Wilkinson. â€Å"Whither Industrial Design† 14 Intellectual Property Journal 1 (2000). A seminal article on the development of the law of industrial designs, it provides a thorough overview of the genesis of the law, problems faced in its historical development and its current status. It situates the problem of overlap in the historical context and demonstrates linkages. The article does a comprehensive study of the current legal systems in place to protect industrial designs, identifies the elements within them and situates them in the larger paradigm of intellectual property law to understand the origin of the rights better. It also briefly survey the international framework in place to deal with industrial designs, the compromises sought to be reached and the harmonizing measures so far undertaken to afford protection to industrial designs. Dr. Ramesh, â€Å"Registration of Designs: Need a Fresh Look† 32(1&2) Indian Bar Review, 83 (2005). The article does a brief review of the need to protect industrial designs, about the intrinsic value of a useful good which also looks attractive and appealing and the economic benefits to be derived from it. It gives a historical perspective of the development of design law and the requirements of the law as it currently stands. It gives a short description of the application procedure, and then, by drawing a linkage between the objective of the law and the rights given it reviews the remedies for infringement and analyses whether they are adequate or not. It also points out some flaws in the existing design protection framework in India and makes a very good argument for such flaws to be corrected. S.H.S. Leong, â€Å"Protection of Industrial Designs as Intellectual Property Rights† Journal of Business Law 239,243 (2003). The article essentially deals with the development of the law of industrial designs in Singapore, and it does this by comparison with the English Law. It gives a short description of the transitory changes from the 1842 Act to the 1911 Act, then from the 1956 Act to the 1976 Act in Copyright, and demonstrates how needs of the particular time resulted in the changes embodied in these different laws. It also talks about the necessity of laws like the Unregistered Designs Act, Community Designs Act etc, as available in Europe, so that designs which are not judged to be ‘aesthetically appealing’ but which nevertheless contribute to the value of the product, are protected. It discusses the possibility of shapes being protected under trademark law and patent law, and concludes that a separate law to deal with designs is very necessary. E. Setliff, â€Å"Copyright and Industrial Design: An â€Å"Alternative Designs Alternative† 30 Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts 49 (2006). The article, by a brief review of the historical development, points out how crucial the separability doctrine has become, due to the traditional reluctance of Court to recignise applied art as having artistic value. The article argues vehemently at such an assumption. It argues that industrial design actually embodies aesthetic expression to a much greater extent than function. Although its primary purpose might have been to make the products of industry more commercially successful by changing, and even disguising, their aesthetic appearance, its artistic value cannot be denigrated from. It critics some of the literature thus far which celebrates the lower quality of the work in designs, and explains why the separability of the design has become problematic specially because it depends on the court’s subjective notion of what constitutes â€Å"art† who go by traditional choices and the author demonstrates the dangers of this approach. G. Scanlan, S. Gale, â€Å"Industrial Design and the Design Directive: Continuing and Future Problems in Design† Journal of Business Law 91 (2005). This article examines the impact of the overhaul of EC industrial design law on English intellectual property law. It starts out by considering the policy behind the Council Directive. It traces all laws relating to protection of industrial designs in the European context and reviews as to how the directive changes it. It reviews changes to the definition of design, the requirements for novelty and individual character, the relationship between copyright, registered and unregistered designs, the differing treatment of works of artistic craftsmanship and artistic works per se, the treatment of applied designs and the abolition of the compulsory licence regime. On the whole, although the directive, in achieving its stated purpose of harmonizing laws, was forced to be selective in its changes, it nevertheless has a much desired effect. J.H. Reichman, â€Å"Design Protection in Domestic and Foreign Copyright Law: From the Berne Revision of 1948 to the Copyright Act of 1976† Duke Law Journal 1143 (1983). This article attempts to study the complex interactions of the different branches of intellectual property law that seek to regulate the degree of protection to be accorded ornamental designs of useful articles. A circular pattern, the article argues, can be discerned in the treatment of these designs in both foreign and domestic law. The tendency of industrial property law to breed still further instances of underprotection or overprotection then fosters renewed pressures for the regulation of industrial art within the framework of the laws governing literary and artistic property. It uses an extremely detailed analysis of the law in the U.S.A to explain the disjunct. The article also compares the tradition of protection of industrial designs in France, German, the Beneleux countries, and provides a thorough overview of the variety of doctrines that have had a role to play in the current state of law relating to designs. It also, looks at policy objectives, the commercial features of the current legal status, some amendments proposed and the effect of those amendments as well. Umbreit, â€Å"A Consideration of Copyright† 87 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 932 (1939) A foundational work on the development of copyright law, the article gives a very detailed analysis of the components of the protection afforded by copyright, and what works would necessarily qualify for the protection. It focuses extensively on the idea / expression dichotomy in the law of copyright and demonstrates how this demarcates the boundary of copyright protection. The elements of copyright, as described in this article, is highly demanding of the qualities of originality and creativity, and it traces the link from the policy objectives of affording any kind of protection to such artistic work at all, to the categories of creative work considered generally to be within its scope. C. Thompson, â€Å"Not such a Crafty Corkscrew? Sheldon v. Metrokane and the Status of ‘Industrial Designs’ as Works of Artistic Craftsmanship Under Australian law† 26(12) European Intellectual Property Rights Review 548 (2004). A case comment on Sheldon v Metrokane, the article gives a definitive analysis of the exact link between the utilitarian aspects and the design aspects of an article. While the protection is sought to be afforded to the design aspects alone, how this conceptual separability was treated in Sheldon was reviewed. The article also cited some interpretations of the case, which, it viewed as misplaces and suggested a differing analysis of the opinion. S.W. Ackerman, â€Å"Protection of the Design of Useful Articles: Current Inadequacies and Proposes Solutions† 11 Hofstra Lew Review 1043 (1983). It illuminates the policies underlying copyright law, and argues that protection should be extended to the design of useful articles. It contrasts the extent of protection provided by the copyright system with that of the patent system and by a comparison of the amount of effort required on the part of the inventor / author to trigger the protection, conludes that such protection is hardly sufficient. The design of useful articles seems to fall in between these systems, and hence is left largely unprotected.It surveys case law, the danger of judicial discretion and suggests a hybrid theory of patent and copyright to protect designs sufficiently and justifiably which encourage the creation of designs by providing rights to protect against commercial exploitation but not extending those rights to the utilitarian features of the protected article. J.C. Kromer, â€Å"Claiming Intellectual Property† 76 University of Chicago Law Review 719 (2009). The article explores the claiming systems of patent and copyright law with a view to how they affect innovation. The object of this article is to trace the law relating to improvements, in juxtaposition with the stated objective of law of intellectual property rights to achieve the maximum social good. The article approaches the subject from the inventor’s perspective and examines whether the current system of protection of improvements in speech is fair. While patent requires patentees to articulate by the time of the patent grant their invention’s bounds, thus effectively allowing all improvements not within such bounds, copyright law only requires the articulation of a prototypical member of the set of protected works. The law relating to improvements in designs also, follows a similar pattern. All substantially similar works, therefore, could be held as infringement. Copyright therefore, allows far less improvement and deviation from the protected product as allowable than patent, where, anything outside the specified bounds was allowable. J.P. Mikkus, â€Å"Of Industrious Authors and Artful Inventors: Industrial Works and Software at the Frontier of Copyright and Patent Law† 18 Intellectual Property Journal 174 (2004). The article first examines the protection granted by copyright law for functional works typically found in an industrial environment. The article then explores the challenges of copyright protection for the non – literal aspects of computer software and problems faced by inventors and software developers when obtaining patent protection in relation to software. The article criticizes current status of law relating to copyright and patents, in that creative work related to industrial purposes does not get adequate protection in either of the regimes since they show limited openness to intangible products of industry. The critique thus, necessarily involves analysis of the level of originality that an invention / work is required to possess to qualify for protection and exposes anomalies in that regard. W. M. Landes, R. A. Posner, â€Å"Indefinitely Renewable Copyright† 70 University of Chicago Law Review 471 (2003). The article examines the economic rationale of limiting copyright and patents. While the nature of patents is such that the expiration of the rights is a necessary evil to increase the social good, copyright, the article argues, should be afforded for an even longer period of time in the absence of any strong reason not to. In this context the article makes a difference between perpetual copyright and indefinitely renewable copyright. Although the latter concept could turn into the former under very specialized conditions, the article argues that the resulting benefit accruing to the author / artist is much greater than societal loss, and attempts to prove this hypothesis by some statistical evaluations. It points out that works in the ‘public domain’ do not always get negatively affected when copyright protection is expanded, since the greater incentive would spur further creativity. T. Scassa, â€Å"Originality and Utilitarian Works: The Uneasy Relationship between Copyright Law and Unfair Competition† 1 University of Ottawa Technology Law Journal 51 (2004). This article deals with the problem of protection afforded to utilitarian, creative works from a competition perspective. It examines the concept of â€Å"originality† in light of the shifting purposes of copyright law and of the historical relationship of utilitarian works to copyright law. It emphasizes on the overwhelming role that then judiciary in Canada has played in allowing copyright protection for utilitarian works, and this has resulted in a constant swing in the status of the law. It argues that, protecting utilitarian works by copyright has reusled in a loweing of the originality creativity threshold in copyright, which in turn has changed the character of copyright law in some instances and hence creates competition distortions. The problem the article argues, lies in the tension between copyright and unfair competition, primarily in relation to utilitarian works and this results in counterproductive pressures. P. Borderland, â€Å"Where Copyright and Design Patent Meet† 52 Michigan Law Review 33, 43 (1953). This article deals with the fundamental conflict that the protection of industrial artistic design embodies in the paradigm of the law of intellectual property rights. It points out that copyright and patent are basically supposed to protect very different things.The concept of industrial designs, thus, creates an overlap leading to a borderland issue between copyright and patent areas. The paper explores the issues within this boundary confusion, giving attention to the policy considerations involved and attempts to give suggestions towards drawing a sharper boundary between the two. The article theorises that in such a hypothesis, designs would fall more into the realm of patent than copyright, although having unmistakable copyright features. J.H. Reichman, â€Å"Legal Hybrids between the Copyright and Patent Paradigms† 94 Columbia Law Review 2432 (1994) A detailed and comprehensive review of the development of law of intellectual property, the article describes the bargain that is truck in both patent and copyright paradigms and the delicate balancing of interests sought to be achieved. It uses the Paris and Berne Conventions as a starting point, and, working backwards from there demarcates the area of copyright and patent laws. The most prevalent of the hybrids between the two is the existence of commercial designs, and by a thorough analysis of the objectives of law of intellectual property rights, the rights that can be afforded to be protected, concludes that design protection does not fall seamlessly into the copyright paradigm. In this context, it also talks about the law relating to improvements, the necessity of the law, problems facing it and possible solutions. P.J. Saidman, â€Å"The Crisis in the Law of Designs† 89 Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society 301 (2007). The article does a very thorough analysis of the functionality doctrine which has led to so much confusion. Firstly, it attempts to dispel some misconceptions, such as the allegation that artistry must necessarily be useless to qualify for copyright protection. Commenting on the lacunae in the current structure of design laws, the article states that the judicial trends in determining whether or not the functionality and separability test are fulfilled has resulted in the meager forms of protection available to industrial designs weaker than ever. The article suggests that the judicial principle currently in existence in the U.S are flawed, operating upon a narrow understanding of copyright law, and by a comparison with the European system, advocates that the system be employed in the U.S as well. M.A. Lemley â€Å"The Economics of Improvement in Intellectual Property Law† 79 Texas Law Review 989 (1997). This article deals with the crisis in intellectual property law of attempting to protect improvements while discouraging imitation. The law must distinguish between improvement, a necessary part of innovation, and generally to be encouraged, and imitation, which is generally considered both illegal and even immoral. This distinction, the article points out, is not easy to make, but it is critical to achieving the proper balance of intellectual property rights. Allowing too much imitation will stifle the incentives for development and commercialization of new products. Discouraging improvements on the other hand will freeze development at the first generation of products. The article carries out a thorough economic analysis of the issues involved, and proposes alternative models to make the boundary between imitation and improvement clearer and leave less to the discretion of the courts. N. Snow, â€Å"Proving Fair Use as a Burden of Speech† 31 Cardozo Law Review 1781 (2010). The article deals with the fair use exception in copyright law. It traces the origin of the exception in copyright law, and explains the problems that the flexible doctrine is fraught with. Through a detailed analysis of case law, the article points out the extent of judicial discretion that the doctrine allows. The article evaluates the fair use exception in the context of free speech, and argues that the current judicial trend of requiring defendants to prove that they had used material which were not protected in their expres sion is chilling free speech. G.N. Magliocca, â€Å"Ornamental Design and Incremental Innovation† 86 Marquette Law Review 845 (2003). This article makes an interesting study of the origin and development of design protection law, it analyses the reasons for its slow advancement, the initial reluctance, the controversies and borderline issues that has surrounded the law. Commercial artistry, thus, was more of a problem than it was worth, leading to its neglect for nearly 200 years. The article provides an overview of the political scenario which also created difficulties, deeming designs to be part of the public domain. This Article concludes that there are sound public policy reasons against extending a property right to most commercial art and explores other ways to promote design innovation and since commercial designs occupy a unique position in the law sitting at the confluence of patent, copyright, and trademark doctrine, the article suggests that an ideal solution would require a revamping of the entire existing structure going towards a unified picture of intellectual property law. It also concludes that the economic costs with giving more protection to designs far outweighed the benefits. Table of Cases English Cases Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp The plaintiff sought trademark protection for its World War II video series that had been, but was no longer, protected by a copyright. The Court denied the trademark claim, in part because allowing trademark protection in this case would conflict with copyright law, creating a species of perpetual copyright. The Court termed this perpetual protection a â€Å"mutant† copyright and held that to permit trademark protection following the expiration of a copyright would infringe upon the public’s â€Å"right to copy† an expired copyright. The Court made an analysis of the bargain that is involved in the protection of any intellectual property right and held that allowing such mutation from one form of intellectual property protection to another would completely defeat the very purpose of the bargain and become counterproductive. Millar v. Taylor 98 Eng, Rep. 201, 4 Burr. 2303 (K.B. 1769). This was one of the first judgments concerning copyright in the history of English law. It concerned infringement of the copyright on James Thomson’s poem, â€Å"The Seasons† by Robert Taylor, and the booksellers won a favorable judgment. The judgment is significant for its recognition of property rights in a literary work for the first time. Sheldon and Hammond Pty Ltd v. Metrokane Inc [2004] F.C.A. 19. After the expiry of Le Creuset’s patent for a lever-action corkscrew, Metrokane engaged a designer to design a new corkscrew with the mechanics of le creuset but with greater aesthetic appeal, and beauty resulting in the rabbit corkscrew. The case involved a challenge of copyright infringement of Metrokane’s modified model,which they alleges was artistic craftsmanship for which drawings existed. The case is significant for its ruling that, even though some beauty was added to the corkscrew by fashioning a new encasement, the primary purpose remained commercial and hence protection could not be obtained. Only the encasement was attractive, and although conceptually separable, the good relied on the mechanism which was in the public domain. Copyright protection to the entire corkscrew, was therefore, denied, since the encasement alone did not qualify for protection due to the design copyright overlap. Kieselstein-Cord v. Accessories by Pearl, Inc. 632 F.2d 989 (2d Cir. 1980). A jewelry designer obtained copyright registrations for a line of decorative belt buckles inspired by artistic works. The designs became successful and were eventually copied by another company.The designer sued for copyright infringement and the company countered with the argument that the belt buckles were not appropriate copyrightable subject matter because they were useful articles. The Court used the separability doctrine to award in favour of the plaintiff. It came up with the novel concept of focusing its analysis on the â€Å"primary† and â€Å"subsidiary† portions of the useful articles and held that since they were conceptually separable, in that the primary ornamental aspect of the buckles is conceptually separable from their subsidiary utilitarian function, it was entitled to protection. PHG Technologies, LLC, v. St. John Companies 459 F.Supp.2d 640 (2006). At issue in this case were design patents claiming an ornamental design for a label pattern for a medical label sheet. The Court replaced its own prior test for functionality with a new one which requires a court to assess the utility of the proffered alternative designs and determine whether the chosen design best achieves the functional aspects of the article. If it does, then presumably the design choice was made for functional reasons, and any resulting design patent is invalid. In other words, the designer is penalized in the event that their best design choice also happens to lend itself to even marginally increased utility over the design alternatives. The final verdict went againt the plaintiffs in this analysis. Indian cases Samsonite Corporation v. Vijay Sales 73 (1998) DLT 732. The case concerned the alleged infringement of the plaintiff’s design rights in suitcases. The plaintiff alleged that one series of suitcases had been specially designed and surface embellishment chosen for the System 4 Range. The plaintiff’s claimed copyright in the drawings and said that the defendant, stocking a similar type of suitcase from VIP, had infringed upon the copyright and had indulged in the tort of passing off. The court however, first ruled that if any intellectual property subsisted in the cases, it was in the nature of a design right, taking note of S. 15 of the Copyright Act. Secondly, the Court held, enough identifying factors had been used with the series for a normal public acquainted with two famous brands to be impressed by the difference, and hence passing off could not also be claimed. Microfirms Inc. v. Girdhar and and Co and Ors 128 (2006) DLT 238 The plaintiff in this case claimed copyright infringement in respect of designs on the upholstery manufactured and marketed by the plaintiff. An allegation of copying and of passing off was also made. The court rules that, a requirement of registration under the deigns act did not preclude the protection of copyright. If design law was not applicable, civil remedies through copyright would still be available normally. But in this case, since the design’s attractiveness derives from the article in which it is embodied, copyright protection could not be afforded, and S 15 of the Copyright Act expressly delegated designs capable of registration to the area of the design act. Hence, the claims could not stand, since no copyright subsisted. AGA Medical Corporation v. Mr. Faisal Kapadi and Anr 103 (2003) DLT 321. The plaintiff in this case was a pioneer in trans cathartic technologies. Several drawings made for the manufacture of some cathartic devices were registered under copyright in the U.S. The defendant here was alleged to have attempted passing off, and releasing brochures depicting the exact same product using the exact same shape. The Court ruled against the plaintiffs, finding that even if copyright did subsist in the drawings, the minute they were converted into three dimensional products they lost that right by virtue of S. 15 of the copyright Act. The difference between two dimensional and three dimensional reproduction was elaborated on, and the Court gave a very definitive analysis of S. 15(2) and rules that the plaintiff did not have copyright in the drawings, and since the three dimensional objects could not be said to completely copy the plaintiff’s production, no right was infringed. ——————————————– [ 2 ]. P. Goldstein, Copyright 1:35 (2nd edn., Vol 1.New York: Aspen Law and Business 2002). [ 3 ]. Ibid at 1:44. [ 4 ]. V.R. Moffat, â€Å"Mutant Copyrights and Backdoor Patents: The Problem of Overlapping Intellectual Protection† 19 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 1473, 1474 (2004). [ 5 ]. Millar v. Taylor 98 Eng, Rep. 201, 4 Burr. 2303 (K.B. 1769). [ 6 ]. Supra note 1 at 1:10. [ 7 ]. P.K. Schalestock, â€Å"Forms of Redress for Design Piracy: How Victims can Use Existing Copyright Law† 21 Seattle University Law Review 113, 117 (1997). [ 8 ]. M.C. Broaddus, â€Å"Designers Should Strive to Create ‘Useless’ Products: Using the Useful Article Doctrine to Avoid Separability Analysis† 51 South Texas Law Review 493, 494 (2009). [ 9 ]. S. P. Ladas, Patents, Trademarks and Related Rights: National and International Protection 828 – 35 (Harvard: Harvard University Press 1975). [ 10 ]. A. Muhlstein, M.A. Wilkinson. â€Å"Whither Industrial Design† 14 Intellectual Property Journal 1, 10 (2000). [ 11 ]. Ibid at 11. [ 12 ]. 35 U.S.C.  § 171 (1976). [ 13 ]. First copyright act passed in 1709, and in 1787, the first designs act which was passed aimed to give very little copyright protection to those engaged in the arts of designing clothes and those who designed or procured new and original designs for these types of goods obtained the sole right of reprinting them for two months. The protection of designs was considered to be a part of copyright. [ 14 ]. Dr. Ramesh, â€Å"Registration of Designs: Need a Fresh Look† 32(1&2) Indian Bar Review, 83, 85 (2005). [ 15 ]. The designs covered during the historical development of the law of designs were of three types: Pattern or print to be worked on or worked into a tissue or textile fabric, modeling, casting, embossment, chasing, engraving or any other kind of impression or ornament, shape or configuration of any article of manufacture. Design law therefore, sought to protect both shapes and surface decoration. [ 16 ]. E. Setliff, â€Å"Copyright and Industrial Design: An †Å"Alternative Designs Alternative† 30 Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts 49, 61 (2006). [ 17 ]. S.W. Ackerman, â€Å"Protection of the Design of Useful Articles: Current Inadequacies and Proposes Solutions† 11 Hofstra Lew Review 1043, 1061 (1983). [ 18 ]. S.H.S. Leong, â€Å"Protection of Industrial Designs as Intellectual Property Rights† Journal of Business Law 239,243 (2003). [ 19 ]. Supra note 16 at 1053. [ 20 ]. Supra note 9 at 18 [ 21 ]. Supra note 15 at 52. [ 22 ]. There were many who had vested interests in the system which would afford some protection for industrial designs against copyists. The result was that when the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act was passed in 1988, an attempt was made to draw a boundary between copyright and registered designs and to exclude functional designs from copyright protection, but also a new type of monopoly, design right was created. It covers functional designs and was reminiscent of the design protection for articles having some purpose of utility. [ 23 ]. Laddie, Prescott, Vitoria, The Modern Law of Copyrights and Designs 1891 (3rd ed., Vol. 2, London: Butterworths 2000). [ 24 ]. Mazer v. Stein, 347 U.S. 201 (1954) [ 25 ]. Supra note 6 at 117. [ 26 ]. G. Scanlan, S. Gale, â€Å"Industrial Design and the Design Directive: Continuing and Future Problems in Design† Journal of Business Law 91,97 (2005). [ 27 ]. J.H. Reichman, â€Å"Design Protection in Domestic and Foreign Copyright Law: From the Berne Revision of 1948 to the Copyright Act of 1976† Duke Law Journal 1143, 1181 (1983) [ 28 ]. K.B. Umbreit, â€Å"A Consideration of Copyright† 87 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 932, 933 (1939); [ 29 ]. Supra note 26 at 1177. [ 30 ]. PHG Technologies, LLC, v. St. John Companies 459 F.Supp.2d 640 (2006). [ 31 ]. 21 Fed. Reg. 6024 (1956) repealed, 43 Fed. Reg. 966 (1978), 37 C.F.R. 966 (1978) [ 32 ]. C. Thompson, â€Å"Not such a Crafty Corkscrew? Sheldon v. Metrokane and the Status of ‘Industrial Designs’ as Works of Artistic Craftsmanship Under Australian law† 26(12) European Intellectual Property Rights Review 548, 554 (2004). [ 33 ]. Sheldon and Hammond Pty Ltd v. Metrokane Inc [2004] F.C.A. 19. [ 34 ]. Kieselstein-Cord v. Accessories by Pearl, Inc. 632 F.2d 989 (2d Cir. 1980). [ 35 ]. Supra note 25 at 94. [ 36 ]. S 22(1) provided that when a design was registered, it would not be an infringement of the corresponding copyright to do anything which was an infringement of the design registration, or, after it expired, would have been if it had not expired. [ 37 ]. B. L. Wadhera, Law Relating to Patents, Trademarks, Copyright, Designs and Geographical Indications 491 (New Delhi: Universal Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd 2004). [ 38 ]. Supra note 22 at 1910. [ 39 ]. M. Howe, Q.C, Russell, Clarke and Howe on Industrial Designs 238 (7th edn., London: Sweet and Maxwell 2005). AGA Medical Corporation v. Mr. Faisal Kapadi and Anr 103 (2003) DLT 321. [ 40 ]. Supra note 16 at 1044: Microfirms Inc. v. Girdhar and and Co and Ors 128 (2006) DLT238 [ 41 ]. Supra note 38 at 259. [ 42 ]. J.C. Kromer, â€Å"Claiming Intellectual Property† 76 University of Chicago Law Review 719, 731 (2009). [ 43 ]. J.P. Mikkus, â€Å"Of Industrious Authors and Artful Inventors: Industrial Works and Software at the Frontier of Copyright and Patent Law† 18 Intellectual Property Journal 174, 194 (2004). [ 44 ]. Copyright law presupposes that, absent subsidies, creators will invest time and resources only if assured of property rights that will enable them to control and profit from it, but it also recognizes that creative efforts necessarily build on the creative efforts which precede them, and hence must be allowed to draw on copyrighted works for inspiration and education. [ 45 ]. Supra note 1 at 1:40. [ 46 ]. Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp 539 U.S. 23 (2003). [ 47 ]. W. M. Landes, R. A. Posner, â€Å"Indefinitely Renewable Copyright† 70 University of Chicago Law Review 471, 475-76 (2003). [ 48 ]. T. Scassa, â€Å"Originality and Utilitarian Works: The Uneasy Relationship between Copyright Law and Unfair Competition† 1 University of Ottawa Technology Law Journal 51, 60 (2004). [ 49 ]. Supra note 8 at 37. [ 50 ]. Supra note 27 at 935. [ 51 ]. Supra note 26 at 1178 [ 52 ]. Supra note 7 at 493. [ 53 ]. P. Borderland, â€Å"Where Copyright and Design Patent Meet† 52 Michigan Law Review 33, 43 (1953). [ 54 ]. J.H. Reichman, â€Å"Legal Hybrids between the Copyright and Patent Paradigms† 94 Columbia Law Review 2432, 2463 (1994): Samsonite Corporation v. Vijay Sales 73 (1998) DLT 732. [ 55 ]. Supra note 26 at 1143. [ 56 ]. Supra note 53 at 2504. [ 57 ]. Supra note 26 at 1160. [ 58 ]. Supra note 42 at 193. [ 59 ]. M.A. Lemley â€Å"The Economics of Improvement in Intellectual Property Law† 79 Texas Law Review 989,996 (1997). [ 60 ]. P.J. Saidman, â€Å"The Crisis in the Law of Designs† 89 Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society 301, 310 (2007). [ 61 ]. Supra note 38 at 73. [ 62 ]. N. Snow, â€Å"Proving Fair Use as a Burden of Speech† 31 Cardozo Law Review 1781, 1786 (2010). [ 63 ]. G.N. Magliocca, â€Å"Ornamental Design and Incremental Innovation† 86 Marquette Law Review 845, 848 (2003). [ 64 ]. Supra note 3 at 1476. [ 65 ]. Supra note 15 at 53. [ 66 ]. Supra note 59 at 313. [ 67 ]. Supra note 26 at 1160. [ 68 ]. Supra note 62 at 847. [ 69 ]. Supra note 38 at 270.