<preface id="preface">
<title>Preface</title>
<indexterm id='idxpoguedavid' class='startofrange'><primary>Pogue, David</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Code (Lessig)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role="bold">At the end</emphasis> of his review of my first
book, <citetitle>Code: And Other Laws of Cyberspace</citetitle>, David
its composer anything.
</para>
<indexterm startref='idxfourneauxhenri' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxkittredgealfred' class='startofrange'><primary>Kittredge, Alfred</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmusicpublishing' class='startofrange'><primary>music publishing</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The composers (and publishers) were none too happy about
<!-- PAGE BREAK 69 -->
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxkittredgealfred' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Sousa, John Philip</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The innovators who developed the technology to record other
(statement of John Philip Sousa, composer).
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxmusicpublishing' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>American Graphophone Company</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>player pianos</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>sheet music</primary></indexterm>
do—the kinds of sharing that file sharing enables, and the kinds
of harm it entails.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxpeertopeerppfilesharingfourtypesof' class='startofrange'><primary>peer-to-peer (p2p) file sharing</primary><secondary>four types of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Napster</primary><secondary>range of content on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 81 -->
File sharers share different kinds of content. We can divide these
wants to give away.
</para></listitem>
</orderedlist>
+<indexterm startref='idxpeertopeerppfilesharingfourtypesof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
How do these different types of sharing balance out?
</para>
<quote>But isn't the war just a war against illegal sharing? Isn't the target
just what you call type A sharing?</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitszerotolerancein' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>zero tolerance in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxnapsterinfringingmaterialblockedby' class='startofrange'><primary>Napster</primary><secondary>infringing material blocked by</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpeertopeerppfilesharinginfringementprotectionsin' class='startofrange'><primary>peer-to-peer (p2p) file sharing</primary><secondary>infringement protections in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
You would think. And we should hope. But so far, it is not. The effect
of the war purportedly on type A sharing alone has been felt far
York: Crown Business, 2003), 269–82.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxnapsterinfringingmaterialblockedby' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpeertopeerppfilesharinginfringementprotectionsin' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
If 99.4 percent is not good enough, then this is a war on file-sharing
technologies, not a war on copyright infringement. There is no way to
p2p, even for the totally legal and beneficial uses they serve, simply to
assure that there are zero copyright infringements caused by p2p.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitszerotolerancein' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Zero tolerance has not been our history. It has not produced the
content industry that we know today. The history of American law has
</para>
<blockquote>
<indexterm><primary>books</primary><secondary>total number of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>films</primary><secondary>total number of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>music recordings</primary><see>peer-to-peer (p2p) file sharing</see></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>music recordings</primary><see>recording industry</see></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>music recordings</primary><secondary>total number of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
It looks like there's about two to three million recordings of music.
Ever. There are about a hundred thousand theatrical releases of
prominent and effective lobbyist in Washington.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Disney, Inc.</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Sony Pictures Entertainment</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>MGM</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Paramount Pictures</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Twentieth Century Fox</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Sony Pictures Entertainment</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Universal Pictures</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Warner Brothers</primary></indexterm>
<para>
but whether institutions designed to assure that artists get paid need
also control how culture develops.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Code (Lessig)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Lessig, Lawrence</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm id='idxfreeculturefourmodalitiesofconstrainton' class='startofrange'><primary>free culture</primary><secondary>four modalities of constraint on</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm id='idxregulationfourmodalitiesof' class='startofrange'><primary>regulation</primary><secondary>four modalities of</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawasexpostregulationmodality' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>as ex post regulation modality</secondary></indexterm>
</para>
<figure id="fig-1331">
<title></title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1331.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1331.svg" align="center" width="45%"></graphic>
</figure>
<indexterm><primary>Madonna</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Other Laws of Cyberspace</citetitle> (New York: Basic Books, 1999): 90–95;
Lawrence Lessig, <quote>The New Chicago School,</quote> <citetitle>Journal of Legal Studies</citetitle>,
June 1998.
+<indexterm><primary>Code (Lessig)</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
The law, in other words, sometimes operates to increase or decrease
the constraint of a particular modality. Thus, the law might be used
<indexterm startref='idxspeedingconstraintson' class='endofrange'/>
<figure id="fig-1361">
<title></title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1361.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1361.svg" align="center" width="45%"></graphic>
</figure>
<indexterm><primary>architecture, constraint effected through</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Commons, John R.</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>architecture, constraint effected through</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>market constraints</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Code (Lessig)</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
</para>
<indexterm startref='idxlawasconstraintmodality2' class='endofrange'/>
</para>
<figure id="fig-1371">
<title></title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1331.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1331.svg" align="center" width="45%"></graphic>
</figure>
<indexterm id='idxarchitectureconstrainteffectedthrough' class='startofrange'><primary>architecture, constraint effected through</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<figure id="fig-1381">
<title></title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1381.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1381.svg" align="center" width="45%"></graphic>
</figure>
<indexterm><primary>Commerce, U.S. Department of</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<figure id="fig-1441">
<title></title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1331.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1331.svg" align="center" width="45%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
We will end here:
</para>
<figure id="fig-1442">
<title></title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1442.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1442.svg" align="center" width="45%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
Let me explain how.
<title>— On which item have the courts ruled that manufacturers and
retailers be held responsible for having supplied the
equipment?</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/vcr-comic.png" align="center" width="65%"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/vcr-comic.png" align="center" width="55%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
The anticircumvention provisions of the DMCA target copyright
the nation's radio advertising revenues.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>cable television</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxnewspapersownershipconsolidationof' class='startofrange'><primary>newspapers</primary><secondary>ownership consolidation of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Newspaper ownership is becoming more concentrated as well. Today,
there are six hundred fewer daily newspapers in the United States than
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxnewspapersownershipconsolidationof' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm startref='idxradioownershipconsolidationin' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The pattern with Murdoch is the pattern of modern media. Not
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxnapsterrecordingindustrytrackingusersof' class='startofrange'><primary>Napster</primary><secondary>recording industry tracking users of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Even this understates the espionage that is being waged by the
RIAA. A report from CNN late last summer described a strategy the
the middle of wars of prohibition. This war is no different.
Says von Lohmann,
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxnapsterrecordingindustrytrackingusersof' class='endofrange'/>
<blockquote>
<para>
So when we're talking about numbers like forty to sixty million
decision in 1995 to strike down a law that banned the possession of
guns near schools.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcommerceinterstate' class='startofrange'><primary>commerce, interstate</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusconstitutionalpowersof2' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>constitutional powers of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinterstatecommerce' class='startofrange'><primary>interstate commerce</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Since 1937, the Supreme Court had interpreted Congress's granted
powers very broadly; so, while the Constitution grants Congress the
instead interpreted to impose no limit.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Rehnquist, William H.</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxunitedstatesvlopez' class='startofrange'><primary>United States v. Lopez</primary></indexterm>/
<para>
The Supreme Court, under Chief Justice Rehnquist's command, changed
that in <citetitle>United States</citetitle> v. <citetitle>Lopez</citetitle>. The government had
later in <citetitle>United States</citetitle> v. <citetitle>Morrison</citetitle>.<footnote><para>
<!-- f7. -->
<citetitle>United States</citetitle> v. <citetitle>Morrison</citetitle>, 529 U.S. 598 (2000).
+<indexterm><primary>United States v. Morrison</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcommerceinterstate' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxunitedstatesvlopez' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
If a principle were at work here, then it should apply to the Progress
Clause as much as the Commerce Clause.<footnote><para>
copyrights should entail that Congress is not allowed to extend the
term of existing copyrights.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxinterstatecommerce' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressussupremecourtrestrainton2' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>Supreme Court restraint on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>United States v. Lopez</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis>If</emphasis>, that is, the principle announced in <citetitle>Lopez</citetitle>
stood for a principle. Many believed the decision in <citetitle>Lopez</citetitle> stood for
devote my life to teaching constitutional law if these nine Justices
were going to be petty politicians.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusconstitutionalpowersof2' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>copyright purpose established in</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>constitutional purpose of</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>duration of</secondary></indexterm>
not expired, and will not expire, so long as Congress is free to be
bought to extend them again.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressussupremecourtrestrainton2' class='endofrange'/>
+
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>It is valuable</emphasis> copyrights that are
responsible for terms being extended. Mickey Mouse and
was little I did beyond preparing for this case. Early on, as I said,
I set the strategy.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Kennedy, Anthony</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>O'Connor, Sandra Day</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Rehnquist, William H.</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>O'Connor, Sandra Day</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Thomas, Clarence</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>United States v. Lopez</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>United States v. Morrison</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Scalia, Antonin</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>Supreme Court restraint on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Supreme Court, U.S.</primary><secondary>congressional actions restrained by</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxsupremecourtusfactionsof' class='startofrange'><primary>Supreme Court, U.S.</primary><secondary>factions of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The Supreme Court was divided into two important camps. One camp we
called <quote>the Conservatives.</quote> The other we called <quote>the Rest.</quote> The
believed, there was a very important free speech argument against
these retrospective extensions.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxsupremecourtusfactionsof' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm startref='idxginsburg' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The only vote we could be confident about was that of Justice
that Congress's power must be interpreted so that its enumerated
powers have limits.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>United States v. Lopez</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>commerce, interstate</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>interstate commerce</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>in constitutional Progress Clause</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Progress Clause</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressuscopyrighttermsextendedby5' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>copyright terms extended by</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>Progress Clause of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
This then was the core of our strategy—a strategy for which I am
responsible. We would get the Court to see that just as with the
copyrights. So, the government argued, the Court should not now say
that practice is unconstitutional.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressuscopyrighttermsextendedby5' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
There was some truth to the government's claim, but not much. We
certainly agreed that Congress had extended existing terms in 1831
here was the place Don Ayer's advice should have mattered. This was a
softball; my answer was a swing and a miss.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>United States v. Lopez</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The second came from the Chief, for whom the whole case had been
crafted. For the Chief Justice had crafted the <citetitle>Lopez</citetitle> ruling,
was the last naïve law professor, scouring the pages, looking for
reasoning.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxunitedstatesvlopez2' class='startofrange'><primary>United States v. Lopez</primary></indexterm>
<para>
I first scoured the opinion, looking for how the Court would
distinguish the principle in this case from the principle in
followed from the <citetitle>Lopez</citetitle> case: In that context, Congress's power would
be limited, but in this context it would not.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxunitedstatesvlopez2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Yet by what right did they get to choose which of the framers' values
they would respect? By what right did they—the silent
<quote>limited,</quote> and the existing term was so long as to be effectively
unlimited, then it was unconstitutional.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxunitedstatesvlopez3' class='startofrange'><primary>United States v. Lopez</primary></indexterm>
<para>
These two justices understood all the arguments we had made. But
because neither believed in the <citetitle>Lopez</citetitle> case, neither was willing to push
<citetitle>Lopez</citetitle> and many other <quote>originalist</quote> rulings. Where was their
<quote>originalism</quote> now?
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxunitedstatesvlopez3' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Here, they had joined an opinion that never once tried to explain
what the framers had meant by crafting the Progress Clause as they
role. Instead, we should be creating incentives for private parties to
serve the public, subject to standards that the government sets.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>domain names</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>domain name registration on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Web sites, domain name registration of</primary></indexterm>
<para>
In the context of registration, one obvious model is the Internet.
There are at least 32 million Web sites registered around the world.
projects / text-free-culture-lessig.git / blobdiff