As I was trying to soak up the diminishing moments of a precious coffee break at uni today – after being given yet another assignment – my friend interrupted me in the midst of my panic and proudly declared that she had the best concept. Not exactly what I wanted to hear.

I mumbled an enquiry to attempt to mask my jealousy and now rapidly increasing panic. Smiling at me (as if to say ‘I’m sitting on a goldmine, sucker’), she dropped her empty cup in the bin, and strode into class.

There I was, next to the bin, bereft of ideas and confused. Did the hideous green-eyed monster scare her off? It wasn’t until later I realised that it (most likely) wasn’t me but, instead, she was protecting her idea.

Now maybe I have too much time on my hands, but this got me thinking. During one of your many hours at uni (or minimal hours if you’re an Arts student) you may have heard the words ‘Intellectual Property’ being thrown around. If you’re anything like me, you probably disregarded them pretty quickly and shrugged them off as another boring uni topic. Yet I’m starting to think it’s more important than I first thought.

Remember when you were little, and every idea you had was absolutely genius (choreographing a dance to the Captain Planet theme song comes to mind). Well now under the Intellectual Property (IP) Law the creative work of individuals is protected. So no, unfortunately you can’t reproduce my Captain Planet choreography without my permission (sorry).

Undoubtedly, providing these creative rights has allowed people to be acknowledged for what they have produced and, in some cases, has protected their right to earn compensation for their idea – which can only be a good thing right? Not necessarily. I can’t help but wonder, how much of the IP law is protecting us, and how much of it is just limiting our creativity?

What strikes me is how anyone can possibly have an original idea.  This certainly isn’t a new debate; it’s nearly impossible to create something that hasn’t already been attempted in some way or another. In writing this now, I have been influenced by teachings and readings that aren’t my own (surprisingly I retained information from class).

It all comes down to where the line is drawn between protecting artists and stopping others from expanding on a pre-existing creation. Of course the IP law allows people to use others’ creative inventions, they just have to purchase the rights to them (which isn’t necessarily a cheap process). I simply can’t fathom why we are trying to make it difficult for people to produce more constructive creations using other people’s work as a basis. What happened to sharing is caring?

Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that the IP law has a place within our society. The bottom line is – stealing is not okay, you wouldn’t steal a handbag…so surely you wouldn’t steal someone’s creative masterpiece right?

Maybe we need to look at it from a different perspective.  If what was put into the public sphere was available for other people to come along and put their own spin on – without having to buy rights or gain permission – it could only enhance creativity. If someone can expand on something you’ve done, alter it in a way that targets a completely new audience or portrays it in a different light, it can only be a good thing. I believe it would actually encourage more creativity. The old adage, ‘two heads is better than one’ applies here and, as lame as it may sound, it only makes sense that we’re able to produce bigger and better things when we work together. It seems that we are too delicate and our egos are too fragile to admit that maybe someone can improve on our idea and that the outcome of that improvement can enhance the benefit we might otherwise have achieved.

If our world continues the way it is and tries to keep ‘protecting’ rights people won’t be able to create anything.  I’m just saying, maybe if my friend had relaxed her grip on her amazing idea, others could have contributed to it to make it something even better.

Which raises the question: do we need to choose between protection and invention? As the world advances and the line blurs even more these laws will inevitably become more stringent, meaning your creative juices will inevitably suffer. For now, I give you my full permission to put your own spin on my Captain Planet choreography…it can only be improved.

While you’re pondering this – or angrily debating my opinion – ask yourself if you believe that Men At Work should have been sued for breach of copyright with the flute solo in ‘Down Under’.

I’d love to hear what you think.

Cat Brooke is a final-year Bachelor of Creative Arts student at La Trobe University and is part of upstart‘s editorial team. You can follow her on Twitter: @CathrynBrooke

Do you agree with Cat? Leave a comment below.