Outweighs on scale and scope.

There is little question that shoring up of IP rights and trade liberalization affects human and cultural rights, economic inequality, labor conditions, environmental protection, and a host of other critical issues. The issues range from providing life-saving drugs to the poorest people in the world to addressing environmental degradation, protecting the global environment, combating unsafe working conditions, and eradicating abusive child labor practices. As with the interplay of IP and inequality more generally, the policy matrix is replete with paradoxes and inherent conflicts. Innovation and expressive creativity promise to help developing nations to address the often dire plight of their citizens. Yet this vision conflicts with various non-utilitarian perspectives as well as the distorting influences of corporate interests and geopolitics.

CONCLUSION

Professor Singer's scholarship emphasizes the need to view property and property institutions through a broader lens that integrates social justice dimensions. Given the growing importance of intangible resources in the economic, the social, and the political spheres, intellectual property scholars must widen our lens as well. Several IP scholars have pointed the way.20 ' This Article has sought to sketch a more capacious framework. Within each mode of intellectual property protection, we need to use a bi-focal lens. In addition to the conventional issues involved in assessing the internal validity of intellectual property regimes (for example, does patent law, trade secret law, and copyright promote progress as judged by the conventional utilitarian lens? Does trademark law effectively safeguard the integrity of the consumer marketplace?), scholars must also explore the broader range of social justice concerns bearing on the particular intellectual property modality: human rights, moral rights, cultural and group interests, indigenous people's rights, distributive concerns, and other externalities, such as environmental degradation and climate change.

Beyond this dual mode-specific focus, intellectual property has important ramifications for larger questions of income, wealth, power, race, and gender inequality as well as global justice. Any legal and policy regime that concentrates economic power and wealth to the extent that intellectual property protection does has far-reaching effects on economic and social justice. The technology and culture industries, grounded in intellectual property, are especially important in driving economic growth, providing telecommunication infrastructure and filling the airwaves, influencing the functioning of political institutions, educating future generations, and addressing public health, food supply, and climate-change challenges on a global scale.