Should study IP as both a mass noun and the individual component parts

While the “IP” in Critical Race IP is not intended to homogenize the various types of intellectual property law, it nonetheless points to the need to study intellectual property both as a mass noun through which policy is obscured and the component parts of that mass noun. Moreover, the work of intellectual property scholars, particularly those concerned with social justice, increasingly reflects the reality that copyrights, trademarks, patents, rights of publicity, trade secrets, and claims of unfair competition are not simply legal regimes confined to the realm of law but cultural objects that move through everyday life.156 That is increasingly true given the growth of international intellectual property regimes and appeals to human rights norms as a means of protecting the interests of marginalized peoples. Untangling the cultural implications of intellectual properties and intellectual property law, and not simply the legal regimes themselves, is therefore central to the “IP” in Critical Race IP.