Creative Intellectual Property Protection

Creative is a kind of wisdom development, a cultural inside story; creative is the creation which destroys the old and establishes the new, is the philosophy which breaks free from convention; creative is a rubik's cube combined magically by intelligent industry, can release the energy by think tank; creative is the creative system engineering, the process of creating the future. In brief, creative is a source of intellectual property rights, is the creative core of economic development.As the development of creative economy, to protect the creative effectively has important significance on practice and theory. Creative is the source of intellectual property rights. No matter the copyrights, patent rights or the trademark, its object comes from the creative fundamentally. The kind of relation between creative and the object decided that is appropriate to use the intellectual property right to protect creative. Now, the intellectual property developed country has already formed a appropriate creative protecting system. For example, the USA formed a legal precedent pattern called "the creative law". However, these methods had some limitation in our country, thus causes the creative to be very difficult in our country judicature to obtain the reality protection.This paper attempts from the theory angle to provide a way using intellectual property rights to protect the creative. First, introduce the history and the concept of creative by reality method. At the same time, compare the character of creative and intellectual property subject matter and concluded that:the creative may integrate the scope of intellectual property rights object. Next, discussed the legitimate of creative intellectual property rights, thus draws the conclusion:integrates the intellectual property rights legal protection conforms to the social economy operating law, and manifests the social justice. Once more, analysis the limitations of current intellectual property laws and the practice of United States, pointed out that is the most effective way. Finally, proposes three kindo conception in theory. Copyright protection; Commercialization right and creative right. So, which one we can choose, then we must consider about the legislative cost and the benefit. The copyright cost is smallest. We just have to re-explain the "idea/expression dichotomy". But this expand still remains to be seen. Although commercialization right can reverse the imbalance between the public and the creative people, but is actually unable to cover all aspects. Moreover this kind of pocket right does not favor to protect the creative. Creative right can stimulate the one to provide more creative full of commercial value. This can fill the blank before we owned the patent and trademark. If we can grasp the principle of appropriate, design the specific system carefully, creative right will become the final choice of creative protection.