Social Innovation Intellectual Property

Dgep Bold Idea: Social Innovation Intellectual Property

Though it is not well-known, the current state of the philanthropic giving world was forever shaped by and altered by the Civil Rights Era of the 1960s.  The policies that now guide the way philanthropies are able to fund social innovation and engagement against challenges such as race and class barriers were impacted by racial unrest of the 1960s in cities around America, including Durham.

Though the associated 501c3 policies that were introduced did a great job of helping to organize the philanthropic industry and associated nonprofit space, it may have suppressed one of the greatest wealth generating mechanisms that BIPOC people – specifically in America, have.

Research and practice shows that BIPOC populations are much more likely to be interested in social entrepreneurship – as a means of helping their families and communities increase their well-being – than whites are.  This is often seen as a liability when encouraging young BIPOC populations to pursue traditional entrepreneurship as a career for wealth generation.  Nonprofit work is satisfying but the social innovative culture within BIPOC communities in America is not economically rewarded.  Tethering that unique intellectual capital exclusively to a non-profit business model limits the potential of wealth creation for BIPOC communities.

What if there was a way to turn that unique perspective of the historically oppressed into an asset for themselves, their families, and their communities, as the world grapples with strategies for racial equity?  Though this seems counterintuitive, as social innovation is typically considered an open sourced activity, a closer look reveals that perspective has generally been racialized.  For example, energy and the environment – thought of as important social efforts and most often associated with the white community – is allowed to produce intellectual property assets and wealth generation.  Whereas, an effort around environmental justice innovation – most likely related to impacts on BIPOC communities, would be categorized within the category expected to be given to society at no cost.

What if society monetized and protected socially innovative intellectual property in the way it does traditional innovative intellectual property?  This would have the potential to not only drive unprecedented and innovative approaches and efforts towards value-based challenges in society, but also has the potential to turn what is now an innate asset within the BIPOC community into a real asset with financial value.

This is quite a radical idea, but one that DGEP is exploring and attempting to model with our intellectual property attorneys at Stanek Lemon.  North Carolina Central University, one of only 6 HBCUs in the United States (out of 111) that has a law school, also has an Intellectual Property Clinic.  This provides a keen environment and atmosphere to innovate around the concept of protectable social innovation intellectual property.