


































Economics, Law and Policy 
ISSN 2576-2060 (Print) ISSN 2576-2052 (Online) 

Vol. 8, No. 1, 2025 

www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elp 

28 
 

Original Paper 

The Conflict and Coordination between Intellectual Property 

Law and Human Rights Law in the Context of Globalization and 

Digitization 

Siyu Tan
1
 

1
 University of Leeds LS2 9JT, Leeds, UK 

 

Received: January 3, 2025     Accepted: January 15, 2025     Online Published: January 17, 2025 

doi:10.22158/elp.v8n1p28            URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/elp.v8n1p28 

 

Abstract 

In the current era of digitalization and globalization, both intellectual property law and human rights 

law are facing unprecedented challenges and opportunities. In the process of constantly seeking the 

balance between the two, there are inevitably multiple conflicts, such as excessive protection of 

intellectual property rights that may limit the freedom of knowledge acquisition guaranteed by human 

rights law, and human rights demands that may also impact the exclusivity of intellectual property 

rights. It is necessary to explore ways to coordinate the conflicts between them in order to build a more 

harmonious and sustainable socio-economic and cultural environment. This article aims to analyze in 

depth the conflict manifestations and root causes of these two types of laws in the context of digitization 

and globalization, and actively explore feasible strategies for coordinating conflicts. By elaborating on 

the concepts and connotations of the two, analyzing their conflicts in multiple aspects such as 

balancing interests and acquiring knowledge resources, and exploring various strategies for 

coordinating conflicts in this new era environment, including the improvement of legal systems and the 

enhancement of public awareness of rights and interests, in order to promote the harmonious 

coexistence of the two under the legal framework of modern society and jointly promote social 

development. 

Keywords 

intellectual property law, human rights law, digital background, conflict resolution 

 

 

 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elp                   Economics, Law and Policy                        Vol. 8, No. 1, 2025 

29 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

1. Introduction 

The digital wave is sweeping across the world and changing the way of creating and utilizing the 

knowledge, while globalization has made this impact cross national borders, tightly linking countries 

and regions together. In this context, the complex relationship between intellectual property law and 

human rights law has become more subtle. The intellectual property law aims to protect the rights of 

creators of various intellectual achievements, stimulate innovation and creative expression (Feng, X. Q. 

& Zhou, H. W., 2019, pp. 188-195); The purpose of human rights law is to safeguard the fundamental 

rights of individuals and groups, and to uphold core values such as human dignity, equality, and 

freedom. However, as these two laws operate on the track of digitization and globalization, a series of 

collisions inevitably arise. In the digital age, the speed and scope of knowledge dissemination are faster, 

and the difficulty of protecting intellectual property rights has also increased. Meanwhile, globalization 

has blurred the boundaries of intellectual property, allowing multinational corporations to use and 

disseminate intellectual property globally, posing new challenges to the protection of intellectual 

property. On the other hand, the development of Internet technology has made personal privacy and 

information security the focus of human rights law. At the same time, the trend of globalization has 

made the application of human rights law more extensive, taking into account the differences in culture, 

law, and values among different countries and regions. Therefore, in the context of digitalization and 

globalization, the relationship between intellectual property law and human rights law has become 

more complex and subtle. We need to achieve a balance and coordination between protecting 

intellectual property rights and encouraging innovation, while also safeguarding the basic rights and 

dignity of individuals. 

 

2. Some Significant Conflicts between Intellectual Property Law and Human Rights Law in the 

Context of Digitization and Globalization 

2.1 The Challenges Caused by the Expansion of Intellectual Property on Education and Academic 

Research 

With the advent of the digital age, the speed and scope of knowledge dissemination have become faster 

and wider, which has brought new challenges and opportunities for intellectual property protection. In 

order to adapt to this new situation, intellectual property laws are constantly being revised and 

improved, and their protection scope has also expanded to a certain extent (Gao, L., 2022, pp. 59-69). 

This expansion is mainly reflected in the protection of emerging fields such as digital media and 

network technology. For example, many countries have introduced relevant anti piracy laws to crack 

down on piracy in digital media; At the same time, some countries have also strengthened online 

copyright protection by monitoring and combating infringement through technological means. 

However, the expansion of intellectual property rights has also sparked some conflicts with human 

rights law. On the one hand, overly strict intellectual property protection may lead to technological 

barriers, hindering the dissemination and application of technology, thereby affecting the public’s right 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elp                   Economics, Law and Policy                        Vol. 8, No. 1, 2025 

30 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

to access knowledge and information. On the other hand, the expansion of intellectual property rights 

may also conflict with social public interests such as the public’s right to know and education. For 

example, in some cases, the holder of intellectual property may restrict others’ fair use of their work, 

which to some extent limits the public’s free access to and dissemination of knowledge. In addition, in 

the context of globalization, the cross-border protection of intellectual property rights has also brought 

new challenges. There are differences in intellectual property laws between different countries, which 

may lead to an increase in cross-border intellectual property disputes. At the same time, some 

developed countries may use their strong economic power and technological advantages to promote the 

internationalization of intellectual property protection, thereby to some extent harming the interests of 

developing countries and vulnerable groups. 

In the context of digitization and globalization, education and academic research may also face the 

following challenges under the expansion of intellectual property rights, firstly in the process of 

obtaining research materials being restricted. Some academic databases and research resources are 

strictly protected by intellectual property rights, and obtaining these resources often requires paying 

high fees. For educational institutions and students, this may be a significant expense that limits their 

access to necessary information, especially for schools with limited funds and impoverished students, 

which may affect the depth and breadth of their learning and research. Secondly, even if one has the 

ability to pay the fees, they may still be subject to various constraints when using the data due to 

complex authorization terms and usage restrictions. For example, it can only be used in specific devices 

or network environments, and cannot be copied or shared in large quantities, which makes the use of 

materials less flexible and convenient, reducing the efficiency of research and learning. 

In the fields of education and academia, the potential obstruction of academic exchange and knowledge 

dissemination is also a prominent issue. At present, some journals and academic platforms have set 

strict regulations on paper publication in order to protect their intellectual property rights. This may 

result in some valuable research findings being difficult to publish due to not meeting specific 

requirements, or the publication process being lengthy and complex, affecting the timeliness and 

breadth of academic communication. Researchers may also face limitations when sharing their findings. 

For example, some intellectual property regulations may not allow researchers to freely share their 

papers with others unless they go through a cumbersome authorization process, which hinders the rapid 

dissemination of knowledge in the academic community and is not conducive to the development and 

innovation of the discipline. 

In the context of this conflict, it is likely to further lead to an imbalanced distribution of educational 

resources, resulting in a greater concentration of high-quality educational resources in developed 

regions. Because developed regions have stronger economic and technological capabilities to access 

and use educational resources protected by intellectual property rights, while underdeveloped regions 

may face difficulties in fully enjoying these resources due to resource and funding shortages, further 

exacerbating the imbalance of educational resources. From a micro perspective, large and well-known 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elp                   Economics, Law and Policy                        Vol. 8, No. 1, 2025 

31 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

educational institutions may obtain more intellectual property authorizations and have richer 

educational resources with strong funds and influence. However, small educational institutions or 

ordinary schools may be at a disadvantage in terms of educational resources due to their inability to 

afford related expenses, which affects their teaching quality and student development, and is also not 

conducive to the realization of educational equity. 

Finally, this conflict pattern may also potentially inhibit innovation and academic freedom. Excessive 

intellectual property protection may make researchers overly concerned about infringement issues 

when conducting research, afraid to try new research ideas and methods easily, and afraid of violating 

certain intellectual property boundaries. This to some extent restricts researchers’ innovative thinking 

and is not conducive to academic breakthroughs and development. In academic research, if intellectual 

property disputes are accidentally involved, researchers may need to spend a lot of time and energy 

dealing with legal procedures and resolving disputes, which not only affects the research progress but 

may also have a negative impact on the reputation and career development of researchers, causing them 

to have concerns when innovating. 

2.2 Cultural Diversity and the Monopoly of Ethnic Intellectual Property Rights 

Driven by the wave of globalization, the channels for cultural dissemination are increasing day by day, 

and its scope of influence has reached unprecedented breadth. A few developed countries, with their 

strong economic strength and technological support, occupy a pivotal position in the cultural industry 

and hold the dominant power. The intellectual property intensive cultural products they produce, such 

as Hollywood blockbusters and works of popular music stars, have formed overwhelming market 

advantages on a global scale. This phenomenon not only makes it difficult for local cultural products to 

establish themselves in the international market, but also poses a serious threat to global cultural 

diversity. 

Taking a certain country in Africa as an example, its traditional ethnic dance and music were originally 

loved by the local people, but with the influx of Western popular music, the local music culture 

gradually declined. The younger generation tends to imitate and pursue foreign cultures, leading to a 

discontinuity in the inheritance of local culture. From the perspective of human rights law, this cultural 

invasion essentially infringes upon the right of different ethnic groups to maintain and inherit their 

unique cultures (Luo, A. J. & Yang, Y. B., 2010, pp. 26-28). 

On the other hand, in regions with relatively abundant ethnic or regional cultural resources, many 

precious traditional knowledge and folk arts contain profound wisdom and cultural connotations (Qing, 

Y., 2012, pp. 147-152). However, in the globalized commercial utilization, these valuable resources 

often fail to receive the respect and fair treatment they deserve. Some multinational companies or 

institutions use this traditional knowledge for commercial development without permission, making 

huge profits from it. However, regions with rich traditional culture often lack corresponding awareness 

and means of intellectual property protection, and are unable to effectively protect the cultural 

knowledge forms that have been passed down for generations. For example, certain unique medical 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elp                   Economics, Law and Policy                        Vol. 8, No. 1, 2025 

32 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

knowledge originates from a remote tribe, and through generations of inheritance and development, has 

formed a unique treatment system. However, these pharmaceutical knowledge have been stolen by 

some pharmaceutical companies for free, sold at high prices after packaging and promotion, and the 

tribes that originally possessed these knowledge have not received any economic returns. A similar 

situation also occurs in the field of traditional handicrafts, where some exquisite handicrafts are 

extensively replicated and sold at low prices, leading to livelihood difficulties for artisans in their place 

of origin. This exploitative development of traditional cultural resources not only damages the 

economic interests of traditional regions, but also tramples on their development and cultural rights. 

2.3 Imbalance between Privacy Rights and Data Protection within the Framework of Intellectual 

Property Law 

The digital wave has led to the generation of massive amounts of data, many of which have commercial 

value. Some companies often optimize their products, provide services, or conduct precision marketing 

by collecting, analyzing, and utilizing large amounts of user data, which can easily infringe upon users’ 

privacy rights. For example, some companies may collect personal information from users without 

their explicit consent, or use user data for purposes unrelated to providing services. The collection of 

these data often does not obtain sufficient user consent, seriously violating the privacy rights protected 

by human rights law. 

With the development of artificial intelligence technology, works created by artificial intelligence have 

also sparked a large number of disputes over intellectual property ownership. At the same time, the 

sources of data collected for training artificial intelligence systems and the mechanisms for protecting 

the rights of data subjects are not yet clear, which poses a threat to basic human rights such as privacy. 

In terms of intellectual property ownership of artificial intelligence works, due to the particularity of 

artificial intelligence, the generated works often involve the rights and interests of multiple parties, 

including developers, users, and data providers of artificial intelligence. However, the existing 

intellectual property legal framework often struggles to clearly define the rights and interests of these 

entities, leading to an imbalance in data protection in disputes over intellectual property ownership. On 

the one hand, developers of artificial intelligence may believe that their works generated through 

algorithms and models should enjoy copyright; On the other hand, data providers may believe that the 

raw data they provide plays a crucial role in the generation of the work and should also enjoy 

corresponding rights. This kind of controversy may not only lead to legal disputes, but also affect the 

innovation and development of artificial intelligence technology. In terms of specific cases, there have 

been multiple legal cases related to copyright of artificial intelligence works in China. For example, in 

the case of Tencent v. Yingxun for infringement of copyright and unfair competition, the court 

determined that the article in question was created by a creative team organized by the plaintiff, 

including an editorial team, product team, and technical team, using artificial intelligence software, and 

constituted a legal person’s work, which should be protected by copyright. This case reflects the 

complexity of copyright ownership for artificial intelligence works and highlights the importance of 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elp                   Economics, Law and Policy                        Vol. 8, No. 1, 2025 

33 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

data protection in it. 

 

3. The Root Causes of Conflicts between Intellectual Property Law and Human Rights Law in 

the Context of Digitization and Globalization 

3.1 Differences in Interest Demands and Value Orientation 

As a specialized legal system, the core purpose of intellectual property law is to protect and reflect the 

interests and needs of intellectual property owners, such as enterprises, creators, inventors, and other 

parties. By clearly granting these owners exclusive rights, intellectual property law not only provides 

them with a fertile ground for innovation, but also guarantees at the institutional level that their creative 

achievements and investment returns can be reasonably and effectively maintained (Tan, M., 2017, p. 

144). This exclusive design of rights aims to motivate more individuals and organizations to engage in 

knowledge innovation and artistic creation, thereby promoting cultural prosperity and technological 

progress throughout society. However, unlike intellectual property law, human rights law takes a more 

macro and universal perspective, focusing on safeguarding the fundamental rights of all individuals and 

groups of humanity. The human rights law emphasizes core values such as fairness, equality, and 

sustainable human development, and is committed to ensuring that every individual, regardless of their 

social status, economic conditions, or cultural background, can enjoy basic dignity and rights as a 

human being. These rights include but are not limited to the right to life, freedom, property rights, and 

the pursuit of happiness, which together form the cornerstone of human rights law. It is precisely 

because of the fundamental differences in interest orientation between these two legal systems that they 

may conflict in certain situations. The maximization of individual interests pursued by intellectual 

property law may sometimes come into conflict with the principles of fairness and equality advocated 

by human rights law (Wang, G. Z., 2017, pp. 70-72). 

Finally, in terms of the value orientation of both, the value of intellectual property law is mainly 

reflected in encouraging innovation, promoting technological progress, and cultural prosperity. Its core 

lies in safeguarding the enthusiasm of knowledge producers through exclusive rights to knowledge 

achievements. And human rights law takes the fundamental rights and dignity of human beings as its 

core values, such as freedom, equality, fairness, etc. When facing complex issues in the process of 

digitization and globalization, this difference in value bias can lead to many contradictions. 

3.2 Differences in Normative Logic 

The normative logic of intellectual property law is deeply rooted in the soil of private rights protection, 

emphasizing and implementing strict exclusive protection. From copyright to patent rights, each 

intellectual property right is an exclusive authorization for a specific object, which grants the right 

holder exclusive control over the intellectual property for a certain period of time (Yan, Y. H. & Gan, 

X. L., 2012, pp. 12-21). This not only reflects respect for the individual labor achievements of creators 

and inventors, but also ensures through legal means that they can receive the due rewards from their 

intellectual labor, thereby encouraging more innovation and creativity (Yang, C. R., 2006, pp. 12-16). 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elp                   Economics, Law and Policy                        Vol. 8, No. 1, 2025 

34 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

In contrast, the logical starting point of human rights law is more based on the overall fairness and 

justice of society. The human rights law advocates a collective and universal concept of rights, 

emphasizing that human rights are fundamental rights that everyone can equally enjoy and should not 

be restricted by any specific private rights. This concept aims to safeguard the basic dignity and living 

conditions of all individuals, ensuring that everyone can enjoy equal rights and opportunities at all 

levels of society. The universality of human rights law enables it to transcend disputes over individual 

interests and examine and uphold fairness and justice in the entire society from a higher perspective. 

Therefore, although intellectual property law and human rights law differ in the objects and methods of 

protection, they both play indispensable roles in their respective fields. The intellectual property law 

promotes social progress and innovation by protecting individual intellectual achievements; And 

human rights laws safeguard social fairness and justice by protecting the basic rights and interests of 

every individual. The two complement each other and jointly build a legal system that respects 

individual innovation while ensuring collective fairness. 

 

4. Coordination of Conflicts between Intellectual Property Law and Human Rights Law in the 

Context of Digitization and Globalization 

4.1 Legal Policy Adjustments 

4.1.1 Balance the Level of Intellectual Property Protection 

At the legislative level, we urgently need to re-examine and adjust the scope and duration of 

intellectual property protection. The purpose of this review is not to weaken the protection of 

intellectual property rights, but to seek a more balanced and socially beneficial protection mechanism. 

Especially for knowledge fields that involve public interests and are closely related to basic human 

rights, such as education, healthcare, etc., we should consider appropriately lowering the threshold for 

intellectual property protection. 

This adjustment helps to promote the free dissemination of knowledge and enhance human capabilities. 

Taking the education sector as an example, excessively high intellectual property protection thresholds 

may hinder the sharing and dissemination of educational resources, thereby affecting the fairness and 

accessibility of education. To alleviate this contradiction, we can develop special copyright policies for 

educational literature materials (Zeng, T., 2020, pp. 272-293). For example, an “educational copyright 

licensing” mechanism can be established to allow educational institutions to obtain the permission to 

copy, distribute, and use specific literature materials for teaching purposes after paying reasonable fees. 

This can not only protect the legitimate rights and interests of intellectual property owners, but also 

promote the widespread dissemination and fair access to educational resources. 

In addition to the education sector, intellectual property protection in the medical field is also worth 

paying attention to. In the medical field, the intellectual property protection of some key medical 

technologies, drugs, and treatment methods may affect the treatment effectiveness and life health of 

patients. Therefore, for medical knowledge closely related to basic human rights, we also need to 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elp                   Economics, Law and Policy                        Vol. 8, No. 1, 2025 

35 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

consider protecting intellectual property while ensuring that the public can access these critical medical 

resources in a timely and fair manner. 

Taking the “Education Copyright Exception” policy implemented by a certain country in recent years 

as an example, the policy clearly stipulates that in certain circumstances, educational institutions can 

copy and disseminate specific literature materials for teaching purposes without obtaining permission 

from the copyright owner. The implementation of this policy greatly promotes the sharing and 

dissemination of educational resources, reduces education costs, and improves the popularity and 

quality of education. At the same time, the policy also safeguards the legitimate rights and interests of 

intellectual property owners from excessive infringement by setting reasonable restrictions, such as 

limiting the quantity and scope of copying, requiring copyright information to be indicated, etc. This 

successful case provides us with valuable reference experience and proves the necessity and feasibility 

of re-examining and adjusting the scope and duration of intellectual property protection at the 

legislative level. 

4.1.2 Emphasize the Positioning of Human Rights in Intellectual Property Policies 

When formulating intellectual property policies, we should consider human rights as an important 

factor and explicitly incorporate it into the policy-making system. This means that when constructing 

policy frameworks such as trade-related intellectual property agreements, our perspective cannot be 

limited solely to the interests of rights holders. On the contrary, we need to broaden our thinking and 

deeply consider the human rights protection needs of different countries and groups. 

Human rights are universal and inalienable, including but not limited to the right to life, freedom, 

dignity, etc., which are fundamental rights that every individual should enjoy. Therefore, when 

formulating intellectual property policies, we must ensure that these policies not only contribute to 

innovation and economic development, but also safeguard people’s basic human rights from 

infringement. At the same time, we should fully embody the values of fairness, equality, and 

development advocated by human rights law. This means that we must strive to ensure that intellectual 

property policies do not lead to unfair distribution of resources and do not exacerbate social inequality. 

We need to promote the sharing and dissemination of knowledge, and drive the overall progress and 

development of society through the formulation and implementation of policies. For example, when 

formulating trade-related intellectual property agreements, we can consider setting up provisions to 

safeguard the rights of developing countries and vulnerable groups in accessing knowledge, technology, 

and information. This can not only promote knowledge sharing and technology dissemination globally, 

but also promote fair trade and cooperation among countries. 

4.2 Deepening International Cooperation and Coordination 

In the context of deepening globalization, international organizations such as the United Nations play a 

crucial role in promoting global governance and maintaining international order. Seeking coordination 

and balance between intellectual property law and human rights law has become an important issue that 

international organizations urgently need to address. Specifically, more effective cooperation 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elp                   Economics, Law and Policy                        Vol. 8, No. 1, 2025 

36 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

mechanisms can be established between the World Intellectual Property Organization and the Office of 

the High Commissioner for Human Rights to jointly address global challenges. In addition, the 

protection of traditional knowledge is also an area worthy of attention. Many traditional knowledge 

have unique cultural and practical value, but also face the risk of abuse and theft. How to protect 

traditional knowledge while respecting and safeguarding the rights of indigenous peoples and 

traditional communities is an urgent issue that needs to be addressed. Through the cooperation between 

the World Intellectual Property Organization and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human 

Rights, we can conduct in-depth research on the protection of traditional knowledge and develop 

targeted action frameworks and guidelines. In order to promote this process, the World Intellectual 

Property Organization (WIPO), the United Nations Human Rights Council and other international 

platforms can be used to actively establish an effective mechanism for coordinating intellectual 

property law and human rights law and supervise their implementation, regularly organize expert 

seminars, develop cooperative research plans, and promote in-depth understanding and cooperation 

between the two sides in the field of intellectual property law and human rights law through 

information sharing, experience exchange and other ways. 

In addition, actively promoting the participation and voice of developing countries, strengthening 

bilateral and multilateral dialogue between developed and developing countries on intellectual property 

and human rights issues, formulating more fair and reasonable international intellectual property rules, 

and reflecting human rights considerations are also extremely important measures. In the process of 

globalization, developing countries are in a relatively special position regarding intellectual property 

and human rights issues. It is necessary to ensure that developing countries can actively participate in 

the formulation of international intellectual property rules, fully express their demands for human rights 

protection, and prevent international intellectual property rules from being dominated by the interests 

of individual developed countries, which may harm the common human rights of people in developing 

countries. 

 

5. Summary 

In the wave of digitization and globalization, the conflict and coordination between intellectual 

property law and human rights law have become increasingly prominent, becoming a focus of 

international attention. This article explores how to achieve an effective balance between the two in the 

current era by deeply analyzing their inherent connections and potential contradictions. With the rapid 

development of digital technology, the scope of intellectual property protection continues to expand 

and the strength of protection continues to strengthen. However, this has also brought about a series of 

human rights issues, such as freedom of information and protection of privacy rights. How to protect 

intellectual property rights without infringing on individual human rights has become an urgent 

problem to be solved. This article reveals the conflict points between intellectual property law and 

human rights law in practical operation by analyzing specific cases, and proposes corresponding 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elp                   Economics, Law and Policy                        Vol. 8, No. 1, 2025 

37 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

solutions. Meanwhile, this article also emphasizes the important role of government, enterprises, social 

organizations, and individuals in coordinating the relationship between intellectual property law and 

human rights law. Only with the joint participation and active consultation of all parties can a joint 

force be formed to promote harmonious coexistence between the two. In the future, with the further 

deepening of digitization and globalization, the conflict and coordination issues between intellectual 

property law and human rights law will become more complex and varied. Therefore, we need to 

continue to pay attention to the development trends in this field, strengthen international cooperation 

and exchanges, and jointly explore a more perfect legal system to better safeguard human innovation 

achievements and basic rights. In short, the conflict and coordination between intellectual property law 

and human rights law in the context of digitization and globalization is a long-term and complex 

process. We need to adopt an open, inclusive, and cooperative attitude, constantly explore and practice, 

and contribute wisdom and strength to achieve a balance and win-win situation between the two. 

 

References 

Feng, X. Q., & Zhou, H. W. (2019). Research on the Public Interest Value Orientation of Intellectual 

Property. Xuehai, (01), 188-195.  

Gao, L. (2022). On the Balance of Interests in Intellectual Property Law in the Digital Age. Zhejiang 

Journal, (04), 59-69.  

Luo, A. J., & Yang, Y. B. (2010). The “contradiction” in intellectual property rights—Human rights 

and private rights. Intelligence Exploration, (06), 26-28. 

Qing, Y. (2012). Philosophical Reflection on Intellectual Property Law: From the Perspective of 

Human Rights. Journal of Yunnan University (Law Edition), (02), 147-152. 

Tan, M. (2017). A Brief Discussion on the Value Orientation and Legislative Purpose of Intellectual 

Property Law. Chizi (mid to high), (01), 144. 

Wang, G. Z. (2017). A Brief Discussion on the Balance Theory in Intellectual Property Law. Net 

Monthly Journal, (01), 70-72. 

Yan, Y. H., & Gan, X. L. (2012). The historical tradition and contemporary fate of the principle of 

public interest in intellectual property law. Intellectual Property, (09), 12-21. 

Yang, C. R. (2006). The justice value orientation of intellectual property law. Electronic Intellectual 

Property, (07), 12-16. 

Zeng, T. (2020). Intellectual property law that integrates public and private sectors. Private Law, (01), 

272-293. 

 

 


