<chapter label="6" id="founders">
<title>CHAPTER SIX: Founders</title>
<indexterm id='idxbooksenglishcopyrightlawdevelopedfor' class='startofrange'><primary>books</primary><secondary>English copyright law developed for</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawdevelopmentof' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>development of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawenglish' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>English</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxenglandcopyrightlawsdevelopedin' class='startofrange'><primary>England, copyright laws developed in</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxunitedkingdomhistoryofcopyrightlawin' class='startofrange'><primary>United Kingdom</primary><secondary>history of copyright law in</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Branagh, Kenneth</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Henry V</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Shakespeare, William</primary></indexterm>
copyright. Prices of the classics were thus kept high; competition to
produce better or cheaper editions was eliminated.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxbritishparliament' class='startofrange'><primary>British Parliament</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>British Parliament</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightdurationof2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>duration of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>renewability of</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Statute of Anne (1710)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Now, there's something puzzling about the year 1774 to anyone who
</para>
<indexterm startref='idxromeoandjulietshakespeare' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm startref='idxtonsonjacob' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxlawcommonvspositive' class='startofrange'><primary>law</primary><secondary>common vs. positive</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>positive law</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Licensing Act (1662)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The reason is that the English hadn't yet agreed on what a <quote>copyright</quote>
that the publishers, or <quote>Stationers,</quote> had an exclusive right to print
books.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightdurationof2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>common law</primary></indexterm>
<para>
There was no <emphasis>positive</emphasis> law, but that didn't mean
that there was no law. The Anglo-American legal tradition looks to
question after the licensing statutes had expired was whether the
common law protected a copyright, independent of any positive law.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxlawcommonvspositive' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Conger</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxbritishparliament' class='startofrange'><primary>British Parliament</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Scottish publishers</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxstatuteofanne' class='startofrange'><primary>Statute of Anne (1710)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This question was important to the publishers, or <quote>booksellers,</quote> as
they were called, because there was growing competition from foreign
ultimately
resulted in the Statute of Anne.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightasnarrowmonopolyright' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>as narrow monopoly right</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The Statute of Anne granted the author or <quote>proprietor</quote> of a book an
exclusive right to print that book. In an important limitation,
published by anyone. Or so the legislature is thought to have
believed.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxstatuteofanne' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Now, the thing to puzzle about for a moment is this: Why would
Parliament limit the exclusive right? Not why would they limit it to
the particular limit they set, but why would they limit the right
<emphasis>at all?</emphasis>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxbritishparliament' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Shakespeare, William</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Romeo and Juliet (Shakespeare)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
For the booksellers, and the authors whom they represented, had a very
strong claim. Take <citetitle>Romeo and Juliet</citetitle> as an example: That play
Statute of Anne. Second, we have to see something important about
<quote>booksellers.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>usage restrictions attached to</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
First, about copyright. In the last three hundred years, we have come
to apply the concept of <quote>copyright</quote> ever more broadly. But in 1710, it
distribute, the exclusive right to perform, and so on.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Branagh, Kenneth</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Shakespeare, William</primary></indexterm>
<para>
So, for example, even if the copyright to Shakespeare's works were
perpetual, all that would have meant under the original meaning of the
right to print—no less, of course, but also no more.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Henry VIII, King of England</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmonopolycopyrightas' class='startofrange'><primary>monopoly, copyright as</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Statute of Monopolies (1656)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Even that limited right was viewed with skepticism by the British.
only so long as it benefited society. The British saw the harms from
specialinterest favors; they passed a law to stop them.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxbooksellers' class='startofrange'><primary>booksellers, English</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Milton, John</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxbooksellersenglish' class='startofrange'><primary>booksellers, English</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Conger</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightdurationof3' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>duration of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Second, about booksellers. It wasn't just that the copyright was a
monopoly. It was also that it was a monopoly held by the booksellers.
Property</citetitle> (New York: J. Messner, Inc., 1937), 31.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Enlightenment</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>knowledge, freedom of</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Many believed the power the booksellers exercised over the spread of
knowledge was harming that spread, just at the time the Enlightenment
the time, and these powerful commercial interests were interfering
with that idea.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxbritishparliament2' class='startofrange'><primary>British Parliament</primary></indexterm>
<para>
To balance this power, Parliament decided to increase competition
among booksellers, and the simplest way to do that was to spread the
an indirect way to assure competition among publishers, and thus the
construction and spread of culture.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxstatuteofanne2' class='startofrange'><primary>Statute of Anne (1710)
+</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinperpetuity' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>in perpetuity</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
When 1731 (1710 + 21) came along, however, the booksellers were
getting anxious. They saw the consequences of more competition, and
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxstatuteofanne2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinperpetuity' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>common law</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>law</primary><secondary>common vs. positive</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>positive law</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Having failed in Parliament, the publishers turned to the courts in a
series of cases. Their argument was simple and direct: The Statute of
Statute of Anne copyright had expired. This, they argued, was the only
way to protect authors.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Patterson, Raymond</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxbritishparliament2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This was a clever argument, and one that had the support of some of
the leading jurists of the day. It also displayed extraordinary
The bookseller didn't care squat for the rights of the author. His
concern was the monopoly profit that the author's work gave.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxdonaldsonalexander' class='startofrange'><primary>Donaldson, Alexander</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Patterson, Raymond</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxscottishpublishers' class='startofrange'><primary>Scottish publishers</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The booksellers' argument was not accepted without a fight.
The hero of this fight was a Scottish bookseller named Alexander
(London: Routledge, 1992), 62–69.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxstatuteofanne3' class='startofrange'><primary>Statute of Anne (1710)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxconger' class='startofrange'><primary>Conger</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Boswell, James</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Erskine, Andrew</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Ibid., 93.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcommonlaw' class='startofrange'><primary>common law</primary></indexterm>
<para>
When the London booksellers tried to shut down Donaldson's shop in
Scotland, he responded by moving his shop to London, where he sold
rested his right to compete upon the ground that, under the Statute of
Anne, the works he was selling had passed out of protection.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxconger' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxmillarvtaylor' class='startofrange'><primary>Millar v. Taylor</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The London booksellers quickly brought suit to block <quote>piracy</quote> like
Donaldson's. A number of actions were successful against the <quote>pirates,</quote>
the most important early victory being <citetitle>Millar</citetitle> v. <citetitle>Taylor</citetitle>.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxdonaldsonalexander' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxscottishpublishers' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxthomsonjames' class='startofrange'><primary>Thomson, James</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinperpetuity2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>in perpetuity</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Seasons, The (Thomson)</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Taylor, Robert</primary></indexterm>
<para>
rule thus effectively gave the booksellers a perpetual right to
control the publication of any book assigned to them.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcommonlaw' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxthomsonjames' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinperpetuity2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxbritishparliament3' class='startofrange'><primary>British Parliament</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Considered as a matter of abstract justice—reasoning as if
justice were just a matter of logical deduction from first
Crown coveted to the free culture that we inherited.
</para>
<indexterm startref='idxmansfieldwilliammurraylord2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxdonaldsonalexander2' class='startofrange'><primary>Donaldson, Alexander</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxscottishpublishers2' class='startofrange'><primary>Scottish publishers</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The fight to defend the limits of the Statute of Anne was not to end
there, however, and it is here that Donaldson enters the mix.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Thomson, James</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Beckett, Thomas</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxhouseoflords' class='startofrange'><primary>House of Lords</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxsupremecourtushouseoflordsvs' class='startofrange'><primary>Supreme Court, U.S.</primary><secondary>House of Lords vs.</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Millar died soon after his victory, so his case was not appealed. His
estate sold Thomson's poems to a syndicate of printers that included
Court. In February of 1774, that body had the chance to interpret the
meaning of Parliament's limits from sixty years before.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxmillarvtaylor' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxbritishparliament3' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxdonaldsonvbeckett' class='startofrange'><primary>Donaldson v. Beckett</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcommonlaw2' class='startofrange'><primary>common law</primary></indexterm>
<para>
As few legal cases ever do, <citetitle>Donaldson</citetitle> v. <citetitle>Beckett</citetitle> drew an
enormous amount of attention throughout Britain. Donaldson's lawyers
specified in the Statute of Anne expired, works that had been
protected by the statute were no longer protected.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxstatuteofanne3' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The House of Lords was an odd institution. Legal questions were
presented to the House and voted upon first by the <quote>law lords,</quote>
Justices in our Supreme Court. Then, after the law lords voted, the
House of Lords generally voted.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxsupremecourtushouseoflordsvs' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinperpetuity3' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>in perpetuity</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpublicdomainenglishlegalestablishmentof' class='startofrange'><primary>public domain</primary><secondary>English legal establishment of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The reports about the law lords' votes are mixed. On some counts,
it looks as if perpetual copyright prevailed. But there is no ambiguity
fixed for a limited time, after which the work protected by copyright
passed into the public domain.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Bacon, Francis</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Bunyan, John</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Johnson, Samuel</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Milton, John</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Shakespeare, William</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<quote>The public domain.</quote> Before the case of <citetitle>Donaldson</citetitle>
v. <citetitle>Beckett</citetitle>, there was no clear idea of a public domain in
over creative works expired, and the greatest works in English
history—including those of Shakespeare, Bacon, Milton, Johnson,
and Bunyan—were free of legal restraint.
-<indexterm><primary>Bacon, Francis</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Bunyan, John</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Johnson, Samuel</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Milton, John</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Shakespeare, William</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxdonaldsonalexander2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxscottishpublishers2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcommonlaw2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinperpetuity3' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpublicdomainenglishlegalestablishmentof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Scottish publishers</primary></indexterm>
<para>
It is hard for us to imagine, but this decision by the House of Lords
fueled an extraordinarily popular and political reaction. In Scotland,
Rose, 97.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxhouseoflords' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
In London, however, at least among publishers, the reaction was
equally strong in the opposite direction. The <citetitle>Morning Chronicle</citetitle>
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm><primary>House of Lords</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>free culture</primary><secondary>English legal establishment of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 105 -->
<quote>Ruined</quote> is a bit of an exaggeration. But it is not an exaggeration to
culture is available to people and how they get access to it are made
by the few despite the wishes of the many.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxbooksellers' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxbooksellersenglish' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>British Parliament</primary></indexterm>
<para>
At least, this was the rule in a world where the Parliament is
antimonopoly, resistant to the protectionist pleas of publishers. In a
world where the Parliament is more pliant, free culture would be less
protected.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxbritishparliament' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm startref='idxbooksenglishcopyrightlawdevelopedfor' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawdevelopmentof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawenglish' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxenglandcopyrightlawsdevelopedin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxunitedkingdomhistoryofcopyrightlawin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightasnarrowmonopolyright' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmonopolycopyrightas' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightdurationof3' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxdonaldsonvbeckett' class='endofrange'/>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 106 -->
</chapter>
<chapter label="7" id="recorders">
<title>CHAPTER SEVEN: Recorders</title>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawfairuseand' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>fair use and</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxdocumentaryfilm' class='startofrange'><primary>documentary film</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxelsejon' class='startofrange'><primary>Else, Jon</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfairuseindocumentaryfilm' class='startofrange'><primary>fair use</primary><secondary>in documentary film</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfilmsfairuseofcopyrightedmaterialin' class='startofrange'><primary>films</primary><secondary>fair use of copyrighted material in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>Jon Else</emphasis> is a filmmaker. He is best
known for his documentaries and has been very successful in spreading
he told me a story about the freedom to create with film in America
today.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxwagnerrichard' class='startofrange'><primary>Wagner, Richard</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>San Francisco Opera</primary></indexterm>
<para>
In 1990, Else was working on a documentary about Wagner's Ring
Cycle. The focus was stagehands at the San Francisco Opera.
During a show, they hang out below the stage in the grips' lounge and
in the lighting loft. They make a perfect contrast to the art on the
stage.
-<indexterm><primary>San Francisco Opera</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxsimpsonsthe' class='startofrange'><primary>Simpsons, The</primary></indexterm>
<para>
During one of the performances, Else was shooting some stagehands
playing checkers. In one corner of the room was a television set.
it, this touch of cartoon helped capture the flavor of what was special
about the scene.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxwagnerrichard' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>films</primary><secondary>multiple copyrights associated with</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Years later, when he finally got funding to complete the film, Else
attempted to clear the rights for those few seconds of <citetitle>The Simpsons</citetitle>.
copyrighted material you need the permission of the copyright owner,
unless <quote>fair use</quote> or some other privilege applies.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Gracie Films</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxgraciefilms' class='startofrange'><primary>Gracie Films</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxgroeningmatt' class='startofrange'><primary>Groening, Matt</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Else called <citetitle>Simpsons</citetitle> creator Matt Groening's office to get permission.
Groening approved the shot. The shot was a four-and-a-halfsecond image
Groening was happy to have it in the film, but he told Else to contact
Gracie Films, the company that produces the program.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Gracie Films</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfoxfilmcompany' class='startofrange'><primary>Fox (film company)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Gracie Films was okay with it, too, but they, like Groening, wanted
to be careful. So they told Else to contact Fox, Gracie's parent company.
room shot of the film. Matt Groening had already given permission,
Else said. He was just confirming the permission with Fox.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxgraciefilms' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Then, as Else told me, <quote>two things happened. First we discovered
… that Matt Groening doesn't own his own creation—or at
to use this four-point-five seconds of … entirely unsolicited
<citetitle>Simpsons</citetitle> which was in the corner of the shot.</quote>
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Herrera, Rebecca</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxgroeningmatt' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfoxfilmcompany' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxherrerarebecca' class='startofrange'><primary>Herrera, Rebecca</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Else was certain there was a mistake. He worked his way up to someone
he thought was a vice president for licensing, Rebecca Herrera. He
rate, Herrera told Else. A day or so later, Else called again to
confirm what he had been told.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Wagner, Richard</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<quote>I wanted to make sure I had my facts straight,</quote> he told me. <quote>Yes, you
have your facts straight,</quote> she said. It would cost $10,000 to use the
to Herrera told Else later on, <quote>They don't give a shit. They just want
the money.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxherrerarebecca' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>San Francisco Opera</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Day After Trinity, The</primary></indexterm>
<para>
replaced the shot with a clip from another film that he had worked on,
<citetitle>The Day After Trinity</citetitle>, from ten years before.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxfoxfilmcompany2' class='startofrange'><primary>Fox (film company)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxgroeningmatt2' class='startofrange'><primary>Groening, Matt</primary></indexterm>
<para>
There's no doubt that someone, whether Matt Groening or Fox, owns the
copyright to <citetitle>The Simpsons</citetitle>. That copyright is their property. To use
episode is clearly a fair use of <citetitle>The Simpsons</citetitle>—and fair use does
not require the permission of anyone.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxfoxfilmcompany2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxgroeningmatt2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 109 -->
So I asked Else why he didn't just rely upon <quote>fair use.</quote> Here's his reply:
</para>
<blockquote>
+<indexterm id='idxfairuselegalintimidationtacticsagainst' class='startofrange'><primary>fair use</primary><secondary>legal intimidation tactics against</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The <citetitle>Simpsons</citetitle> fiasco was for me a great lesson in the gulf between what
lawyers find irrelevant in some abstract sense, and what is crushingly
concept in any concrete way. Here's why:
</para>
<orderedlist numeration="arabic">
-<listitem><para>
+<listitem>
+<indexterm><primary>Errors and Omissions insurance</primary></indexterm>
+<para>
<!-- 1. -->
Before our films can be broadcast, the network requires that we buy
Errors and Omissions insurance. The carriers require a detailed
<quote>fair use</quote> can grind the application process to a halt.
</para></listitem>
<listitem>
-<indexterm><primary><citetitle>Star Wars</citetitle></primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfoxfilmcompany3' class='startofrange'><primary>Fox (film company)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Groening, Matt</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Lucas, George</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary><citetitle>Star Wars</citetitle></primary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- 2. -->
I probably never should have asked Matt Groening in the first
would boil down to who had the bigger legal department and the deeper
pockets, me or them.
<!-- PAGE BREAK 110 -->
-</para></listitem>
+</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxfoxfilmcompany3' class='endofrange'/>
+</listitem>
<listitem><para>
<!-- 4. -->
The question of fair use usually comes up at the end of the
</para></listitem>
</orderedlist>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxsimpsonsthe' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
In theory, fair use means you need no permission. The theory therefore
supports free culture and insulates against a permission culture. But
matured into a sword that interferes with any use, transformative or
not.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawfairuseand' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxdocumentaryfilm' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxelsejon' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfairuseindocumentaryfilm' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfilmsfairuseofcopyrightedmaterialin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfairuselegalintimidationtacticsagainst' class='endofrange'/>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 111 -->
</chapter>
<chapter label="8" id="transformers">
projects / text-free-culture-lessig.git / blobdiff