<!-- PAGE BREAK 4 -->
<!-- PAGE BREAK 5 -->
<!-- PAGE BREAK 6 -->
-<colophon>
-<para>
-THE PENGUIN PRESS, a member of Penguin Group (USA) Inc. 375 Hudson Street New
-York, New York
-</para>
-<para>
-Copyright © Lawrence Lessig. All rights reserved.
-</para>
-<para>
-Excerpt from an editorial titled <quote>The Coming of Copyright Perpetuity,</quote>
-<citetitle>The New York Times</citetitle>, January 16, 2003. Copyright
-© 2003 by The New York Times Co. Reprinted with permission.
-</para>
-<para>
-Cartoon in <xref linkend="fig-1711"/> by Paul Conrad, copyright Tribune
-Media Services, Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.
-</para>
-<para>
-Diagram in <xref linkend="fig-1761"/> courtesy of the office of FCC
-Commissioner, Michael J. Copps.
-</para>
-<para>
-Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
-</para>
-<para>
-Lessig, Lawrence.
-Free culture : how big media uses technology and the law to lock down
-culture and control creativity / Lawrence Lessig.
-</para>
-<para>
-p. cm.
-</para>
-<para>
-Includes index.
-</para>
-<para>
-ISBN 1-59420-006-8 (hardcover)
-</para>
-
-<para>
-1. Intellectual property—United States. 2. Mass media—United States.
-</para>
-<para>
-3. Technological innovations—United States. 4. Art—United States. I. Title.
-</para>
-<para>
-KF2979.L47
-</para>
-<para>
-343.7309'9—dc22
-</para>
-<para>
-This book is printed on acid-free paper.
-</para>
-<para>
-Printed in the United States of America
-</para>
-<para>
-1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4
-</para>
-<para>
-Designed by Marysarah Quinn
-</para>
-
-<para>
-&translationblock;
-</para>
-
-<para>
-Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of
-this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a
-retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means
-(electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise),
-without the prior written permission of both the copyright owner and
-the above publisher of this book.
-</para>
-<para>
-The scanning, uploading, and distribution of this book via the
-Internet or via any other means without the permission of the
-publisher is illegal and punishable by law. Please purchase only
-authorized electronic editions and do not participate in or encourage
-electronic piracy of copyrighted materials. Your support of the
-author's rights is appreciated.
-</para>
-</colophon>
-
<!-- PAGE BREAK 7 -->
<dedication><title></title>
<para>
-To Eric Eldred—whose work first drew me to this cause, and for whom
+To Eric Eldred — whose work first drew me to this cause, and for whom
it continues still.
</para>
</dedication>
<preface id="preface">
<title>PREFACE</title>
-<indexterm id="idxpoguedavid" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Pogue, David</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpoguedavid' class='startofrange'><primary>Pogue, David</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
on-line have fundamentally affected <quote>people who aren't online.</quote> There
is no switch that will insulate us from the Internet's effect.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxpoguedavid" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpoguedavid' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
But unlike <citetitle>Code</citetitle>, the argument here is not much
about the Internet itself. It is instead about the consequence of the
changes I describe affect values that both sides of our political
culture deem fundamental.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxpowerconcentrationof' class='startofrange'><primary>power, concentration of</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>CodePink Women in Peace</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Safire, William</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Stevens, Ted</primary></indexterm>
<para>
We saw a glimpse of this bipartisan outrage in the early summer of
Olympia Snowe and conservative Ted Stevens,</quote> he formulated perhaps
most simply just what was at stake: the concentration of power. And as
he asked,
-<indexterm><primary>Safire, William</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<blockquote>
<para>
you—whether or not you care about the Internet, and whether you're on
Safire's left or on his right.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxpowerconcentrationof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
<emphasis role="strong">The inspiration</emphasis> for the title and for
much of the argument of this book comes from the work of Richard
<!-- PAGE BREAK 16 -->
<chapter label="0" id="c-introduction">
<title>INTRODUCTION</title>
-<indexterm id='idxairtraffic' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>air traffic, land ownership vs.</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxlandownership' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>land ownership, air traffic and</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxproprigtair' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>property rights</primary>
- <secondary>air traffic vs.</secondary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Wright brothers</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxwrightbrothers' class='startofrange'><primary>Wright brothers</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role="strong">On December 17</emphasis>, 1903, on a windy North Carolina beach for just
shy of one hundred seconds, the Wright brothers demonstrated that a
was an explosion of interest in this newfound technology of manned
flight, and a gaggle of innovators began to build upon it.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxairtrafficlandownershipvs' class='startofrange'><primary>air traffic, land ownership vs.</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxlandownershipairtrafficand' class='startofrange'><primary>land ownership, air traffic and</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpropertyrightsairtrafficvs' class='startofrange'><primary>property rights</primary><secondary>air traffic vs.</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
At the time the Wright brothers invented the airplane, American
law held that a property owner presumptively owned not just the surface
rights in land ran to the heavens. Did that mean that you owned the
stars? Could you prosecute geese for their willful and regular trespass?
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxwrightbrothers' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Then came airplanes, and for the first time, this principle of American
law—deep within the foundations of our tradition, and acknowledged
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Causby, Thomas Lee</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Causby, Tinie</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxdouglaswilliamo' class='startofrange'><primary>Douglas, William O.</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxsupremecourtusonairspacevslandrights' class='startofrange'><primary>Supreme Court, U.S.</primary><secondary>on airspace vs. land rights</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the Causbys' case. Congress had
declared the airways public, but if one's property really extended to the
<para>
<quote>Common sense revolts at the idea.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxdouglaswilliamo' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This is how the law usually works. Not often this abruptly or
impatiently, but eventually, this is how it works. It was Douglas's style not to
<quote>common sense</quote>—would prevail. Their <quote>private interest</quote> would not be
allowed to defeat an obvious public gain.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxproprigtair' class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref='idxlandownership' class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref='idxairtraffic' class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm id='idxarmstrongedwin' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Armstrong, Edwin Howard</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxairtrafficlandownershipvs' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxlandownershipairtrafficand' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpropertyrightsairtrafficvs' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxsupremecourtusonairspacevslandrights' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxarmstrongedwinhoward' class='startofrange'><primary>Armstrong, Edwin Howard</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Bell, Alexander Graham</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Edison, Thomas</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Faraday, Michael</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxradiofmspectrumof' class='startofrange'><primary>radio</primary><secondary>FM spectrum of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>Edwin Howard Armstrong</emphasis> is one of
America's forgotten inventor geniuses. He came to the great American
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm id='idxrca' class='startofrange'><primary>RCA</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmediaownershipconcentrationin' class='startofrange'><primary>media</primary><secondary>ownership concentration in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
As our own common sense tells us, Armstrong had discovered a vastly
superior radio technology. But at the time of his invention, Armstrong
a handful of networks.
<!--PAGE BREAK 20-->
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Sarnoff, David</primary></indexterm>
<para>
RCA's president, David Sarnoff, a friend of Armstrong's, was eager
that Armstrong discover a way to remove static from AM radio. So
Sarnoff was quite excited when Armstrong told him he had a device
that removed static from <quote>radio.</quote> But when Armstrong demonstrated
his invention, Sarnoff was not pleased.
-<indexterm><primary>Sarnoff, David</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<blockquote>
<para>
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
-<indexterm id='idxlessing' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Lessing, Lawrence</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfmradio' class='startofrange'><primary>FM radio</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Sarnoff, David</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Armstrong's invention threatened RCA's AM empire, so the company
launched a campaign to smother FM radio. While FM may have been a
superior technology, Sarnoff was a superior tactician. As one author
described,
-<indexterm><primary>Sarnoff, David</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxlessinglawrence' class='startofrange'><primary>Lessing, Lawrence</primary></indexterm>
<blockquote>
<para>
The forces for FM, largely engineering, could not overcome the weight
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm id='idxfcconfmradio' class='startofrange'><primary>FCC</primary><secondary>on FM radio</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
RCA at first kept the technology in house, insisting that further
tests were needed. When, after two years of testing, Armstrong grew
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
-<indexterm startref='idxlessing' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxlessinglawrence' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>AT&T</primary></indexterm>
<para>
To make room in the spectrum for RCA's latest gamble, television,
wired links from AT&T.) The spread of FM radio was thus choked, at
least temporarily.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxradiofmspectrumof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfcconfmradio' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Armstrong resisted RCA's efforts. In response, RCA resisted
Armstrong's patents. After incorporating FM technology into the
now broke, in 1954 Armstrong wrote a short note to his wife and then
stepped out of a thirteenth-story window to his death.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxarmstrongedwin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfmradio' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxarmstrongedwinhoward' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Causby, Thomas Lee</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Causby, Tinie</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This is how the law sometimes works. Not often this tragically, and
rarely with heroic drama, but sometimes, this is how it works. From
process. RCA had what the Causbys did not: the power to stifle the
effect of technological change.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxrca' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmediaownershipconcentrationin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetdevelopmentof' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>development of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role="strong">There's no</emphasis> single inventor of the Internet. Nor is there any good date
upon which to mark its birth. Yet in a very short time, the Internet
would reject it. Yet most don't even see the change that the Internet
has introduced.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetdevelopmentof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Barlow, Joel</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxculturecommercialvsnoncommercial' class='startofrange'><primary>culture</primary><secondary>commercial vs. noncommercial</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Webster, Noah</primary></indexterm>
<para>
We can glimpse a sense of this change by distinguishing between
commercial and noncommercial culture, and by mapping the law's
street corners telling stories that kids and others consumed, that was
noncommercial culture. When Noah Webster published his <quote>Reader,</quote> or
Joel Barlow his poetry, that was commercial culture.
-<indexterm><primary>Barlow, Joel</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Webster, Noah</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
At the beginning of our history, and for just about the whole of our
stories, reenacting scenes from plays or TV, participating in fan
clubs, sharing music, making tapes—were left alone by the law.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitscommercialcreativityasprimarypurposeof' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>commercial creativity as primary purpose of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The focus of the law was on commercial creativity. At first slightly,
then quite extensively, the law protected the incentives of creators by
sense was it dominant within our tradition. It was instead just one
part, a controlled part, balanced with the free.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>free culture</primary><secondary> permission culture vs.</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>permission culture</primary><secondary> free culture vs.</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
This rough divide between the free and the controlled has now
been erased.<footnote><para>
culture, more and more a permission culture.
</para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 24 -->
+<indexterm><primary>Causby, Thomas Lee</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Causby, Tinie</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>protection of artists vs. business interests</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This change gets justified as necessary to protect commercial
creativity. And indeed, protectionism is precisely its
them. It is the story of RCA and Armstrong; it is the dream of the
Causbys.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitscommercialcreativityasprimarypurposeof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
For the Internet has unleashed an extraordinary possibility for many
to participate in the process of building and cultivating a culture
succeeding in their plan to remake the Internet before the Internet
remakes them.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxculturecommercialvsnoncommercial' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Valenti, Jack</primary><secondary> on creative property rights</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
It doesn't seem this way to many. The battles over copyright and the
<!-- PAGE BREAK 25 -->
this change, the war to rid the world of Internet <quote>pirates</quote> will also rid our
culture of values that have been integral to our tradition from the start.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>First Amendment to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>as protection of creators</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>First Amendment</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Netanel, Neil Weinstock</primary></indexterm>
<para>
These values built a tradition that, for at least the first 180 years of
our Republic, guaranteed creators the right to build freely upon their
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Causby, Thomas Lee</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Causby, Tinie</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxintellectualpropertyrights' class='startofrange'><primary>intellectual property rights</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role="strong">Like the Causbys'</emphasis> battle, this war is, in part, about <quote>property.</quote> The
property of this war is not as tangible as the Causbys', and no
the lucky Wright brothers, the Internet has not inspired a revolution
on its side.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>power, concentration of</primary></indexterm>
<para>
My hope is to push this common sense along. I have become increasingly
amazed by the power of this idea of intellectual property and, more
this silliness will be much more profound.
<!-- PAGE BREAK 28 -->
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxintellectualpropertyrights' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
<emphasis role="strong">The struggle</emphasis> that rages just now centers on two ideas: <quote>piracy</quote> and
<quote>property.</quote> My aim in this book's next two parts is to explore these two
<title><quote>PIRACY</quote></title>
<partintro>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 30 -->
-<indexterm id="idxmansfield1" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Mansfield, William Murray, Lord</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>English</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmansfieldwilliammurraylord' class='startofrange'><primary>Mansfield, William Murray, Lord</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>music publishing</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>sheet music</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role="strong">Since the inception</emphasis> of the law regulating creative property, there has
been a war against <quote>piracy.</quote> The precise contours of this concept,
<citetitle>Bach</citetitle> v. <citetitle>Longman</citetitle>, 98 Eng. Rep. 1274 (1777) (Mansfield).
</para></footnote>
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxmansfield1" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmansfieldwilliammurraylord' class='endofrange'/>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm><primary>Internet</primary><secondary> efficient content distribution on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpeertopeerppfilesharingefficiencyof' class='startofrange'><primary>peer-to-peer (p2p) file sharing</primary><secondary>efficiency of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Today we are in the middle of another <quote>war</quote> against <quote>piracy.</quote> The
Internet has provoked this war. The Internet makes possible the
war, as copyright owners fear the sharing will <quote>rob the author of the
profit.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxpeertopeerppfilesharingefficiencyof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The warriors have turned to the courts, to the legislatures, and
increasingly to technology to defend their <quote>property</quote> against this
piracy.
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm><primary>ASCAP</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Dreyfuss, Rochelle</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Girl Schouts</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxifvalue' class='startofrange'>
- <primary><quote>if value, then right</quote> theory</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Girl Scouts</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcreativepropertyifvaluethenrighttheoryof' class='startofrange'><primary>creative property</primary><secondary><quote>if value, then right</quote> theory of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxifvaluethenrighttheory' class='startofrange'><primary><quote>if value, then right</quote> theory</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This view runs deep within the current debates. It is what NYU law
professor Rochelle Dreyfuss criticizes as the <quote>if value, then right</quote>
There was <quote>value</quote> (the songs) so there must have been a
<quote>right</quote>—even against the Girl Scouts.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>ASCAP</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxcreativepropertyifvaluethenrighttheoryof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This idea is certainly a possible understanding of how creative
property should work. It might well be a possible design for a system
theory of creative property has never been America's theory of
creative property. It has never taken hold within our law.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxifvalue' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxifvaluethenrighttheory' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawonrepublishingvstransformationoforiginalwork' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>on republishing vs. transformation of original work</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcreativitylegalrestrictionson' class='startofrange'><primary>creativity</primary><secondary>legal restrictions on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Instead, in our tradition, intellectual property is an instrument. It
sets the groundwork for a richly creative society but remains
the other. Copyright law at its birth had only publishing as its concern;
copyright law today regulates both.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawonrepublishingvstransformationoforiginalwork' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Before the technologies of the Internet, this conflation didn't matter
all that much. The technologies of publishing were expensive; that
Byzantine complexity that copyright law has become. It was just one
more expense of doing business.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>creativity impeded by</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Florida, Richard</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Rise of the Creative Class, The (Florida)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Unfortunately, we are also seeing an extraordinary rise of regulation of
this creative class.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcreativitylegalrestrictionson' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
These burdens make no sense in our tradition. We should begin by
understanding that tradition a bit more and by placing in their proper
<!-- PAGE BREAK 34 -->
<chapter label="1" id="creators">
<title>CHAPTER ONE: Creators</title>
-<indexterm id="idxanimadedcartoons" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>animated cartoons</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxcartoonfilms' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>cartoon films</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxanimatedcartoons' class='startofrange'><primary>animated cartoons</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcartoonfilms' class='startofrange'><primary>cartoon films</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfilmsanimated' class='startofrange'><primary>films</primary><secondary>animated</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxsteamboatwillie' class='startofrange'><primary>Steamboat Willie</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmickeymouse' class='startofrange'><primary>Mickey Mouse</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role="strong">In 1928</emphasis>, a cartoon character was born. An early Mickey Mouse
made his debut in May of that year, in a silent flop called <citetitle>Plane Crazy</citetitle>.
distributed cartoon synchronized with sound, <citetitle>Steamboat Willie</citetitle> brought
to life the character that would become Mickey Mouse.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxdisneywalt' class='startofrange'><primary>Disney, Walt</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Synchronized sound had been introduced to film a year earlier in the
movie <citetitle>The Jazz Singer</citetitle>. That success led Walt Disney to copy the
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm><primary>Iwerks, Ub</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Disney's then partner, and one of animation's most extraordinary
talents, Ub Iwerks, put it more strongly: <quote>I have never been so thrilled
in my life. Nothing since has ever equaled it.</quote>
-<indexterm><primary>Iwerks, Ub</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
Disney had created something very new, based upon something relatively
match. And quite often, Disney's great genius, his spark of
creativity, was built upon the work of others.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxdisneywalt' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxkeatonbuster' class='startofrange'><primary>Keaton, Buster</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxsteamboatbilljr' class='startofrange'><primary>Steamboat Bill, Jr.</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This much is familiar. What you might not know is that 1928 also marks
another important transition. In that year, a comic (as opposed to
incredible stunts. The film was classic Keaton—wildly popular
and among the best of its genre.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxderivativeworkspiracyvs' class='startofrange'><primary>derivative works</primary><secondary>piracy vs.</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpiracyderivativeworkvs' class='startofrange'><primary>piracy</primary><secondary>derivative work vs.</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<citetitle>Steamboat Bill, Jr</citetitle>. appeared before Disney's cartoon Steamboat
Willie.
that we get Steamboat Willie, and then from Steamboat Willie, Mickey
Mouse.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxsteamboatwillie' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmickeymouse' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxkeatonbuster' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxsteamboatbilljr' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcreativitybytransformingpreviousworks' class='startofrange'><primary>creativity</primary><secondary>by transforming previous works</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxdisneyinc' class='startofrange'><primary>Disney, Inc.</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This <quote>borrowing</quote> was nothing unique, either for Disney or for the
industry. Disney was always parroting the feature-length mainstream
others before him, creating something new out of something just barely
old.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxgrimmfairytales' class='startofrange'><primary>Grimm fairy tales</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Sometimes this borrowing was slight. Sometimes it was significant.
Think about the fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm. If you're as
own extraordinary talent, and then burned that mix into the soul of
his culture. Rip, mix, and burn.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxanimadedcartoons" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxgrimmfairytales' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This is a kind of creativity. It is a creativity that we should
remember and celebrate. There are some who would say that there is no
creativity</quote>—a form of expression and genius that builds upon the
culture around us and makes it something different.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxderivativeworkspiracyvs' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpiracyderivativeworkvs' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcreativitybytransformingpreviousworks' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightdurationof' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>duration of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpublicdomaindefined' class='startofrange'><primary>public domain</primary><secondary>defined</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpublicdomaintraditionaltermforconversionto' class='startofrange'><primary>public domain</primary><secondary>traditional term for conversion to</secondary></indexterm>
<para> In 1928, the culture that Disney was free to draw upon was
relatively fresh. The public domain in 1928 was not very old and was
therefore quite vibrant. The average term of copyright was just around
anyone— whether connected or not, whether rich or not, whether
approved or not—to use and build upon.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxanimatedcartoons' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfilmsanimated' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This is the ways things always were—until quite recently. For most
of our history, the public domain was just over the horizon. From
content from before the Great Depression.
</para>
<indexterm startref='idxcartoonfilms' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxdisneyinc' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightdurationof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpublicdomaindefined' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpublicdomaintraditionaltermforconversionto' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Disney, Walt</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role="strong">Of course</emphasis>, Walt Disney had no monopoly on <quote>Walt Disney creativity.</quote>
Nor does America. The norm of free culture has, until recently, and
except within totalitarian nations, been broadly exploited and quite
universal.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcomicsjapanese' class='startofrange'><primary>comics, Japanese</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxderivativeworkspiracyvs2' class='startofrange'><primary>derivative works</primary><secondary>piracy vs.</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxjapanesecomics' class='startofrange'><primary>Japanese comics</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmanga' class='startofrange'><primary>manga</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpiracyderivativeworkvs2' class='startofrange'><primary>piracy</primary><secondary>derivative work vs.</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Consider, for example, a form of creativity that seems strange to many
Americans but that is inescapable within Japanese culture: <citetitle>manga</citetitle>, or
variant on manga that from a lawyer's perspective is quite odd, but
from a Disney perspective is quite familiar.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcreativitybytransformingpreviousworks2' class='startofrange'><primary>creativity</primary><secondary>by transforming previous works</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxdoujinshicomics' class='startofrange'><primary>doujinshi comics</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This is the phenomenon of <citetitle>doujinshi</citetitle>. Doujinshi are also comics, but
they are a kind of copycat comic. A rich ethic governs the creation of
there are committees that review doujinshi for inclusion within shows
and reject any copycat comic that is merely a copy.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxdisneywalt2' class='startofrange'><primary>Disney, Walt</primary></indexterm>
<para>
These copycat comics are not a tiny part of the manga market. They are
huge. More than 33,000 <quote>circles</quote> of creators from across Japan produce
who control the commercial manga market to shut the doujinshi market
down. It flourishes, despite the competition and despite the law.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawjapanese' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>Japanese</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Steamboat Bill, Jr.</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The most puzzling feature of the doujinshi market, for those trained
in the law, at least, is that it is allowed to exist at all. Under
infringement of the original copyright to make a copy or a derivative
work without the original copyright owner's permission.
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxwinickjudd" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Winick, Judd</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxdisneywalt2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxwinickjudd' class='startofrange'><primary>Winick, Judd</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Yet this illegal market exists and indeed flourishes in Japan, and in
the view of many, it is precisely because it exists that Japanese manga
early days of comics in America are very much like what's going on
in Japan now. … American comics were born out of copying each
<!-- PAGE BREAK 40 -->
-other. … That's how [the artists] learn to draw—by going into comic
+other. … That's how [the artists] learn to draw — by going into comic
books and not tracing them, but looking at them and copying them</quote>
and building from them.<footnote><para>
<!-- f5 -->
York: Perennial, 2000).
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawjapanese' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Superman comics</primary></indexterm>
<para>
American comics now are quite different, Winick explains, in part
do. <quote>As a creator, it's frustrating having to stick to some parameters
which are fifty years old.</quote>
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxwinickjudd" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxwinickjudd' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawjapanese2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>Japanese</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>comics, Japanese</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmehrasalil' class='startofrange'><primary>Mehra, Salil</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The norm in Japan mitigates this legal difficulty. Some say it is
precisely the benefit accruing to the Japanese manga market that
rights. This is essentially a prisoner's dilemma solved.</quote>
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcomicsjapanese' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxjapanesecomics' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmanga' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The problem with this story, however, as Mehra plainly acknowledges,
is that the mechanism producing this laissez faire response is not
a more general pattern of blocking this <quote>free taking</quote> by the doujinshi
culture?
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawjapanese2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmehrasalil' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
I spent four wonderful months in Japan, and I asked this question
as often as I could. Perhaps the best account in the end was offered by
piracy, or does it help them? Would lawyers fighting this piracy help
their clients or hurt them?
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxdoujinshicomics' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>Let's pause</emphasis> for a moment.
</para>
believe in the value of that weird form of property that lawyers call
<quote>intellectual property.</quote><footnote><para>
<!-- f7 -->
+<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
The term <citetitle>intellectual property</citetitle> is of relatively recent origin. See
Siva Vaidhyanathan, <citetitle>Copyrights and Copywrongs</citetitle>, 11 (New York: New York
University Press, 2001). See also Lawrence Lessig, <citetitle>The Future of Ideas</citetitle>
(New York: Random House, 2001), 293 n. 26. The term accurately
-describes a set of <quote>property</quote> rights—copyright, patents,
-trademark, and trade-secret—but the nature of those rights is
+describes a set of <quote>property</quote> rights — copyright, patents,
+trademark, and trade-secret — but the nature of those rights is
very different.
-<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
A large, diverse society cannot survive without property; a large,
diverse, and modern society cannot flourish without intellectual
property.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxdisneywalt3' class='startofrange'><primary>Disney, Walt</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxgrimmfairytales2' class='startofrange'><primary>Grimm fairy tales</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Keaton, Buster</primary></indexterm>
<para>
But it takes just a second's reflection to realize that there is
plenty of value out there that <quote>property</quote> doesn't capture. I don't
wrong with the taking from the Grimms because the Grimms' work was in
the public domain.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxfreeculturederivativeworksbasedon' class='startofrange'><primary>free culture</primary><secondary>derivative works based on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Thus, even though the things that Disney took—or more generally,
the things taken by anyone exercising Walt Disney creativity—are
things remain free for the taking within a free culture, and that
freedom is good.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxgrimmfairytales2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawjapanese3' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>Japanese</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>comics, Japanese</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxdoujinshicomics2' class='startofrange'><primary>doujinshi comics</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxjapanesecomics2' class='startofrange'><primary>Japanese comics</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmanga2' class='startofrange'><primary>manga</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The same with the doujinshi culture. If a doujinshi artist broke into
a publisher's office and ran off with a thousand copies of his latest
have stolen something of value. The law bans that stealing in whatever
form, whether large or small.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcreativitybytransformingpreviousworks2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Yet there is an obvious reluctance, even among Japanese lawyers, to
say that the copycat comic artists are <quote>stealing.</quote> This form of Walt
Disney creativity is seen as fair and right, even if lawyers in
particular find it hard to say why.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxderivativeworkspiracyvs2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpiracyderivativeworkvs2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawjapanese3' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxdoujinshicomics2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxjapanesecomics2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmanga2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Shakespeare, William</primary></indexterm>
<para>
It's the same with a thousand examples that appear everywhere once you
begin to look. Scientists build upon the work of other scientists
societies more fully than unfree, perhaps, but all societies to some degree.
<!-- PAGE BREAK 43 -->
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxdisneywalt3' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The hard question is therefore not <emphasis>whether</emphasis> a
culture is free. All cultures are free to some degree. The hard
build upon; unfree, or permission, cultures leave much less. Ours was a
free culture. It is becoming much less so.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxfreeculturederivativeworksbasedon' class='endofrange'/>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 44 -->
</chapter>
<chapter label="2" id="mere-copyists">
<title>CHAPTER TWO: <quote>Mere Copyists</quote></title>
-<indexterm id="idxphotography" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>photography</primary>
-</indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Daguerre, Louis</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcameratechnology' class='startofrange'><primary>camera technology</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxphotography' class='startofrange'><primary>photography</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>In 1839</emphasis>, Louis Daguerre invented
the first practical technology for producing what we would call
Association that helped regulate the industry, as do all such
associations, by keeping competition down so as to keep prices up.)
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Talbot, William</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Yet despite high prices, the demand for daguerreotypes was strong.
This pushed inventors to find simpler and cheaper ways to make
taking of a picture from its developing. These were still plates of
glass, and thus it was still not a process within reach of most
amateurs.
-<indexterm><primary>Talbot, William</primary></indexterm>
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxeastmangeorge" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Eastman, George</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxeastmangeorge' class='startofrange'><primary>Eastman, George</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The technological change that made mass photography possible
didn't happen until 1888, and was the creation of a single man. George
lowering the costs, Eastman expected he could dramatically broaden the
population of photographers.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxkodakcameras' class='startofrange'><primary>Kodak cameras</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxkodakprimertheeastman' class='startofrange'><primary>Kodak Primer, The (Eastman)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Eastman developed flexible, emulsion-coated paper film and placed
rolls of it in small, simple cameras: the Kodak. The device was
<!-- f1 -->
Reese V. Jenkins, <citetitle>Images and Enterprise</citetitle> (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975), 112.
</para></footnote> As he described in <citetitle>The Kodak Primer</citetitle>:
-<indexterm><primary>Kodak Primer, The (Eastman)</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<blockquote>
<para>
chemicals.<footnote>
<para>
<!-- f2 -->
+<indexterm><primary>Coe, Brian</primary></indexterm>
Brian Coe, <citetitle>The Birth of Photography</citetitle> (New York: Taplinger Publishing,
1977), 53.
-<indexterm><primary>Coe, Brian</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxkodakprimertheeastman' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
For $25, anyone could make pictures. The camera came preloaded
with film, and when it had been used, the camera was returned to an
Coe, 58.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>democracy</primary><secondary>in technologies of expression</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>expression, technologies of</primary><secondary>democratic</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
In this way, the Kodak camera and film were technologies of
expression. The pencil or paintbrush was also a technology of
people a way to express themselves more easily than any tools could
have before.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxkodakcameras' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxpermissionsphotographyexemptedfrom' class='startofrange'><primary>permissions</primary><secondary>photography exempted from</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
What was required for this technology to flourish? Obviously,
Eastman's genius was an important part. But also important was the
Dist. Ct. 1894).
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcameratechnology' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxdisneywalt4' class='startofrange'><primary>Disney, Walt</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idximagesownershipof' class='startofrange'><primary>images, ownership of</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The arguments in favor of requiring permission will sound surprisingly
familiar. The photographer was <quote>taking</quote> something from the person or
that they thought valuable.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Brandeis, Louis D.</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Steamboat Bill, Jr.</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcameratechnology2' class='startofrange'><primary>camera technology</primary></indexterm>
<para>
On the other side was an argument that should be familiar, as well.
Sure, there may be something of value being used. But citizens should
<citetitle>Steamboat Bill, Jr</citetitle>. or the Brothers Grimm, the photographer should be
free to capture an image without compensating the source.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>images, ownership of</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxdisneywalt4' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Fortunately for Mr. Eastman, and for photography in general, these
early decisions went in favor of the pirates. In general, no
(1993).
</para></footnote>)
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Kodak cameras</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Napster</primary></indexterm>
<para>
We can only speculate about how photography would have developed had
the law gone the other way. If the presumption had been against the
demonstrated before a company developed pictures. We could imagine a
system developing to demonstrate that permission.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcameratechnology2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcameratechnology3' class='startofrange'><primary>camera technology</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>democracy</primary><secondary>in technologies of expression</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>expression, technologies of</primary><secondary>democratic</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 48 -->
growth in a democratic technology of expression would have been
realized.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxphotography' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxeastmangeorge' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpermissionsphotographyexemptedfrom' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idximagesownershipof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>digital cameras</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxjustthink' class='startofrange'><primary>Just Think!</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>If you drive</emphasis> through San
Francisco's Presidio, you might see two gaudy yellow school buses
something about media by doing something with media. By doing, they
think. By tinkering, they learn.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxeastmangeorge" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref="idxphotography" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxeducationinmedialiteracy' class='startofrange'><primary>education</primary><secondary>in media literacy</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmedialiteracy' class='startofrange'><primary>media literacy</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxexpressiontechnologiesofmedialiteracyand' class='startofrange'><primary>expression, technologies of</primary><secondary>media literacy and</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
These buses are not cheap, but the technology they carry is
increasingly so. The cost of a high-quality digital video system has
just buses like this, but classrooms across the country where kids are
learning more and more of something teachers call <quote>media literacy.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Yanofsky, Dave</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 49 -->
<quote>Media literacy,</quote> as Dave Yanofsky, the executive director of Just
deconstruct media images. Its aim is to make [kids] literate about the
way media works, the way it's constructed, the way it's delivered, and
the way people access it.</quote>
-<indexterm><primary>Yanofsky, Dave</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxjustthink' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This may seem like an odd way to think about <quote>literacy.</quote> For most
people, literacy is about reading and writing. Faulkner and Hemingway
about.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>advertising</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>commercials</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>television</primary><secondary>advertising on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Maybe. But in a world where children see on average 390 hours of
television commercials per year, or between 20,000 and 45,000
of how media works, how it holds an audience or leads it through a
story, how it triggers emotion or builds suspense.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcameratechnology3' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
It took filmmaking a generation before it could do these things well.
But even then, the knowledge was in the filming, not in writing about
reflecting upon what one has written. One learns to write with images
by making them and then reflecting upon what one has created.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxdaleyelizabeth' class='startofrange'><primary>Daley, Elizabeth</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Crichton, Michael</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This grammar has changed as media has changed. When it was just film,
Ibid.
</para></footnote>
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Barish, Stephanie</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm
id='idxbarishstephanie' class='startofrange'><primary>Barish, Stephanie</primary></indexterm>
<para>
As with any language, this language comes more easily to some than to
others. It doesn't necessarily come more easily to those who excel in
opportunity to use film to express meaning about something the
students know something about—gun violence.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxdaleyelizabeth' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The class was held on Friday afternoons, and it created a relatively
new problem for the school. While the challenge in most classes was
<emphasis>these</emphasis> ideas can be expressed well. The power of
this message depended upon its connection to this form of expression.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxbarishstephanie' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxdaleyelizabeth2' class='startofrange'><primary>Daley, Elizabeth</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 52 -->
that you understand, that are your language, and construct meaning
about the topic.…
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Barish, Stephanie</primary></indexterm>
<para>
That empowers enormously. And then what happens, of
course, is eventually, as it has happened in all these classes, they
<!-- FIXME removed a " from the end of the previous paragraph that did
not match with any start quote. -->
</blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxeducationinmedialiteracy' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmedialiteracy' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxexpressiontechnologiesofmedialiteracyand' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxdaleyelizabeth2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxseptemberterroristattacksof' class='startofrange'><primary>September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks of</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>World Trade Center</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxnewscoverage' class='startofrange'><primary>news coverage</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>When two planes</emphasis> crashed into the
World Trade Center, another into the Pentagon, and a fourth into a
captured the attention of the world. There was ABC and CBS, but there
was also the Internet.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxseptemberterroristattacksof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
I don't mean simply to praise the Internet—though I do think the
people who supported this form of speech should be praised. I mean
that this mix of captured images, sound, and commentary can be widely
spread practically instantaneously.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks of</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxblogsweblogs' class='startofrange'><primary>blogs (Web-logs)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetblogson' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>blogs on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxweblogsblogs' class='startofrange'><primary>Web-logs (blogs)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
September 11 was not an aberration. It was a beginning. Around the
same time, a form of communication that has grown dramatically was
cultures, it records private facts in a public way—it's a kind
of electronic <citetitle>Jerry Springer</citetitle>, available anywhere in the world.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>blogs (Web-logs)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>political discourse</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetpublicdiscourseconductedon' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>public discourse conducted on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
But in the United States, blogs have taken on a very different
character. There are some who use the space simply to talk about
criticizing with or adding to them. They are arguably the most
important form of unchoreographed public discourse that we have.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxdemocracyintechnologiesofexpression' class='startofrange'><primary>democracy</primary><secondary>in technologies of expression</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxelections' class='startofrange'><primary>elections</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxexpressiontechnologiesofdemocratic' class='startofrange'><primary>expression, technologies of</primary><secondary>democratic</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
That's a strong statement. Yet it says as much about our democracy as
it does about blogs. This is the part of America that is most
in those elections. The cycle of these elections has become totally
professionalized and routinized. Most of us think this is democracy.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxblogsweblogs' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetblogson' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxweblogsblogs' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Tocqueville, Alexis de</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxdemocracypublicdiscoursein' class='startofrange'><primary>democracy</primary><secondary>public discourse in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>jury system</primary></indexterm>
<para>
But democracy has never just been about elections. Democracy
means rule by the people, but rule means something more than mere
bk. 1, trans. Henry Reeve (New York: Bantam Books, 2000), ch. 16.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxelections' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Yet even this institution flags in American life today. And in its
place, there is no systematic effort to enable citizen deliberation. Some
remains. But for most of us for most of the time, there is no time or
place for <quote>democratic deliberation</quote> to occur.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxpoliticaldiscourse' class='startofrange'><primary>political discourse</primary></indexterm>
<para>
More bizarrely, there is generally not even permission for it to
occur. We, the most powerful democracy in the world, have developed a
</para></footnote> We say what our friends want to hear, and hear very
little beyond what our friends say.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxblogs1' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>blogs (Web-logs)</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxblogsweblogs2' class='startofrange'><primary>blogs (Web-logs)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>e-mail</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetblogson2' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>blogs on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxweblogsblogs2' class='startofrange'><primary>Web-logs (blogs)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxdemocracyintechnologiesofexpression' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxexpressiontechnologiesofdemocratic' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxdemocracypublicdiscoursein' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Enter the blog. The blog's very architecture solves one part of this
problem. People post when they want to post, and people read when they
but there are many of all political stripes. And even blogs that are not
political cover political issues when the occasion merits.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Dean, Howard</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The significance of these blogs is tiny now, though not so tiny. The
name Howard Dean may well have faded from the 2004 presidential race
but for blogs. Yet even if the number of readers is small, the reading
is having an effect.
-<indexterm><primary>Dean, Howard</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Lott, Trent</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Thurmond, Strom</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmediablogpressureon' class='startofrange'><primary>media</primary><secondary>blog pressure on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetnewseventson2' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>news events on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
One direct effect is on stories that had a different life cycle in the
mainstream media. The Trent Lott affair is an example. When Lott
Noah Shachtman, <quote>With Incessant Postings, a Pundit Stirs the Pot,</quote> New
York Times, 16 January 2003, G5.
</para></footnote>
-<indexterm><primary>Lott, Trent</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxmediacommercialimperativesof' class='startofrange'><primary>media</primary><secondary>commercial imperatives of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
This different cycle is possible because the same commercial pressures
don't exist with blogs as with other ventures. Television and
If they lose readers, they lose revenue. Like sharks, they must move
on.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxmediablogpressureon' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>peer-generated rankings on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
But bloggers don't have a similar constraint. They can obsess, they
can focus, they can get serious. If a particular blogger writes a
popular has been selected by a very democratic process of
peer-generated rankings.
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxwinerdave" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Winer, Dave</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxmediacommercialimperativesof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxjournalism' class='startofrange'><primary>journalism</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxwinerdave' class='startofrange'><primary>Winer, Dave</primary></indexterm>
<para>
There's a second way, as well, in which blogs have a different cycle
<!-- PAGE BREAK 57 -->
get it out of the way.</quote>
</para>
<indexterm><primary>CNN</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>media</primary><secondary>commercial imperatives of</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Iraq war</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>media</primary><secondary>ownership concentration in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
These conflicts become more important as media becomes more
concentrated (more on this below). A concentrated media can hide more
optimistic story. When she told New York that wasn't warranted, they
told her that <emphasis>they</emphasis> were writing <quote>the story.</quote>)
</para>
-<para> Blog space gives amateurs a way to enter the
-debate—<quote>amateur</quote> not in the sense of inexperienced, but in the
-sense of an Olympic athlete, meaning not paid by anyone to give their
-reports. It allows for a much broader range of input into a story, as
-reporting on the Columbia disaster revealed, when hundreds from across
-the southwest United States turned to the Internet to retell what they
-had seen.<footnote><para>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetnewseventson2' class='endofrange'/>
+<para>
+Blog space gives amateurs a way to enter the
+debate—<quote>amateur</quote> not in the sense of inexperienced,
+but in the sense of an Olympic athlete, meaning not paid by anyone to
+give their reports. It allows for a much broader range of input into a
+story, as reporting on the Columbia disaster revealed, when hundreds
+from across the southwest United States turned to the Internet to
+retell what they had seen.<footnote><para>
<!-- f20 -->
John Schwartz, <quote>Loss of the Shuttle: The Internet; A Wealth of
Information Online,</quote> <citetitle>New York Times</citetitle>, 2 February 2003, A28; Staci
of the Internet (meaning infringing on copyright), Winer said, <quote>we will
be the last thing that gets shut down.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxjournalism' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This speech affects democracy. Winer thinks that happens because <quote>you
don't have to work for somebody who controls, [for] a gatekeeper.</quote>
happens. When there are ten million, there will be something
extraordinary to report.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxblogs1' class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref="idxwinerdave" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm id="idxbrownjohnseely" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Brown, John Seely</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxadvertising1' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>advertising</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxnewscoverage' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetpublicdiscourseconductedon' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpoliticaldiscourse' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxblogsweblogs2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetblogson2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxweblogsblogs2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxwinerdave' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxbrownjohnseely' class='startofrange'><primary>Brown, John Seely</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxadvertising1' class='startofrange'><primary>advertising</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>John Seely Brown</emphasis> is the chief
scientist of the Xerox Corporation. His work, as his Web site
architecture that unleashes 60 percent of the brain [and] a legal
system that closes down that part of the brain.</quote>
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxbrownjohnseely" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxbrownjohnseely' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
We're building a technology that takes the magic of Kodak, mixes
moving images and sound, and adds a space for commentary and an
</chapter>
<chapter label="3" id="catalogs">
<title>CHAPTER THREE: Catalogs</title>
+<indexterm><primary>Jordan, Jesse</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>RPI</primary><see>Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)</see></indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxrensselaer" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrensselaer' class='startofrange'><primary>Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrensselaerpolytechnicinstituterpicomputernetworksearchengineof' class='startofrange'><primary>Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)</primary><secondary>computer network search engine of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxsearchengines' class='startofrange'><primary>search engines</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxuniversitycomputernetworksppsharingon' class='startofrange'><primary>university computer networks, p2p sharing on</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetsearchenginesusedon' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>search engines used on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>In the fall</emphasis> of 2002, Jesse Jordan
of Oceanside, New York, enrolled as a freshman at Rensselaer
network is designed to enable students to get access to the Internet,
as well as more intimate access to other members of the RPI community.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxgoogle' class='startofrange'><primary>Google</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Search engines are a measure of a network's intimacy. Google
<!-- PAGE BREAK 62 -->
time, enabling employees to have access to material that people
outside the business can't get. Universities do it as well.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxuniversitycomputernetworksppsharingon' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxjordanjesse' class='startofrange'><primary>Jordan, Jesse</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmicrosoftnetworkfilesystemof' class='startofrange'><primary>Microsoft</primary><secondary>network file system of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
These engines are enabled by the network technology itself.
Microsoft, for example, has a network file system that makes it very
technology. It used Microsoft's network file system to build an index
of all the files available within the RPI network.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxgoogle' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Jesse's wasn't the first search engine built for the RPI network.
Indeed, his engine was a simple modification of engines that others
a user could click to see if the machine holding the file was still
on-line.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxmicrosoftnetworkfilesystemof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Jesse's engine went on-line in late October. Over the following six
months, he continued to tweak it to improve its functionality. By
million files in his directory, including every type of content that might
be on users' computers.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetsearchenginesusedon' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Thus the index his search engine produced included pictures, which
students could use to put on their own Web sites; copies of notes or
users of the RPI network made available in a public folder of their
computer.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Google</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>education</primary><secondary>tinkering as means of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
But the index also included music files. In fact, one quarter of the
files that Jesse's search engine listed were music files. But that
environment where tinkering with technology was precisely what he was
supposed to do.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitsinrecordingindustry' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>in recording industry</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitsagainststudentfilesharing' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>against student file sharing</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustrycopyrightinfringementlawsuitsof' class='startofrange'><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>copyright infringement lawsuits of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustryassociationofamericariaacopyrightinfringementlawsuitsfiledby' class='startofrange'><primary>Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)</primary><secondary>copyright infringement lawsuits filed by</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxrensselaerpolytechnicinstituterpicomputernetworksearchengineof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
On April 3, 2003, Jesse was contacted by the dean of students at
RPI. The dean informed Jesse that the Recording Industry Association
created or posted, and the vast majority of which had nothing to do
with music.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxsearchengines' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>exaggerated claims of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>statutory damages of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitsindividualdefendantsintimidatedby' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>individual defendants intimidated by</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>statutory damages</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustryassociationofamericariaaintimidationtacticsof' class='startofrange'><primary>Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)</primary><secondary>intimidation tactics of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
But the RIAA branded Jesse a pirate. They claimed he operated a
network and had therefore <quote>willfully</quote> violated copyright laws. They
hundred specific copyright infringements, they therefore demanded that
Jesse pay them at least $15,000,000.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Princeton University</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Michigan Technical University</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Princeton University</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Similar lawsuits were brought against three other students: one other
student at RPI, one at Michigan Technical University, and one at
(2003): 5, available at 2003 WL 55179443.
</para></footnote>
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxrensselaer" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrensselaer' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Jesse called his parents. They were supportive but a bit frightened.
An uncle was a lawyer. He began negotiations with the RIAA. They
visit to a dentist like me.</quote>) And throughout, the RIAA insisted it
would not settle the case until it took every penny Jesse had saved.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>legal system, attorney costs in</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Jesse's family was outraged at these claims. They wanted to fight.
But Jesse's uncle worked to educate the family about the nature of the
So Jesse faced a mafia-like choice: $250,000 and a chance at winning,
or $12,000 and a settlement.
</para>
-<indexterm>
-<primary>artists</primary>
-<secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>artists</primary><secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>artist remuneration in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)</primary><secondary>lobbying power of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The recording industry insists this is a matter of law and morality.
Let's put the law aside for a moment and think about the morality.
<citetitle>Wall Street Journal</citetitle>, 10 September 2003, A24.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitsindividualdefendantsintimidatedby' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustryassociationofamericariaaintimidationtacticsof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
On June 23, Jesse wired his savings to the lawyer working for the
RIAA. The case against him was then dismissed. And with this, this
pick on him. But he wants to let people know that they're sending the
wrong message. And he wants to correct the record.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxuniversitycomputernetworksppsharingon' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxjordanjesse' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitsinrecordingindustry' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitsagainststudentfilesharing' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustrycopyrightinfringementlawsuitsof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustryassociationofamericariaacopyrightinfringementlawsuitsfiledby' class='endofrange'/>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 66 -->
</chapter>
<chapter label="4" id="pirates">
<title>CHAPTER FOUR: <quote>Pirates</quote></title>
+<indexterm id='idxpiracyindevelopmentofcontentindustry' class='startofrange'><primary>piracy</primary><secondary>in development of content industry</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary><quote>if value, then right</quote> theory</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>If <quote>piracy</quote> means</emphasis>
<para>
The film industry of Hollywood was built by fleeing pirates.<footnote><para>
<!-- f1 -->
+<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
I am grateful to Peter DiMauro for pointing me to this extraordinary
history. See also Siva Vaidhyanathan, <citetitle>Copyrights and Copywrongs</citetitle>, 87–93,
which details Edison's <quote>adventures</quote> with copyright and patent.
-<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
Creators and directors migrated from the East Coast to California in
the early twentieth century in part to escape controls that patents
with producers and theater owners using illegal equipment and
imported film stock to create their own underground market.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Fox, William</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>General Film Company</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Picker, Randal C.</primary></indexterm>
<para>
With the country experiencing a tremendous expansion in the number of
nickelodeons, the Patents Company reacted to the independent movement
Working Paper No. 159.
<indexterm><primary>broadcast flag</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
-<indexterm><primary>Fox, William</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>General Film Company</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Picker, Randal C.</primary></indexterm>
</para>
</blockquote>
<para>
</section>
<section id="recordedmusic">
<title>Recorded Music</title>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawonmusicrecordings' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>on music recordings</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The record industry was born of another kind of piracy, though to see
how requires a bit of detail about the way the law regulates music.
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxfourneauxhenri" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Fourneaux, Henri</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfourneauxhenri' class='startofrange'><primary>Fourneaux, Henri</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Russel, Phil</primary></indexterm>
<para>
At the time that Edison and Henri Fourneaux invented machines
then, I could effectively pirate someone else's song without paying
its composer anything.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxfourneauxhenri" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfourneauxhenri' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The composers (and publishers) were none too happy about
<!-- PAGE BREAK 69 -->
rights.<footnote><para>
<!-- f4 -->
To Amend and Consolidate the Acts Respecting Copyright: Hearings on
-S. 6330 and H.R. 19853 Before the ( Joint) Committees on Patents, 59th
+S. 6330 and H.R. 19853 Before the (Joint) Committees on Patents, 59th
Cong. 59, 1st sess. (1906) (statement of Senator Alfred B. Kittredge,
of South Dakota, chairman), reprinted in <citetitle>Legislative History of the
Copyright Act</citetitle>, E. Fulton Brylawski and Abe Goldman, eds. (South
(statement of John Philip Sousa, composer).
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>American Graphophone Company</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>player pianos</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>sheet music</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on copyright laws</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusonrecordingindustry' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on recording industry</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawstatutorylicensesin' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>statutory licenses in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustrystatutorylicensesystemin' class='startofrange'><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>statutory license system in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
These arguments have familiar echoes in the wars of our day. So, too,
do the arguments on the other side. The innovators who developed the
memorandum of Philip Mauro, general patent counsel of the American
Graphophone Company Association).
</para></footnote>
-<indexterm><primary>American Graphophone Company</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>cover songs</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The law soon resolved this battle in favor of the composer
<emphasis>and</emphasis> the recording artist. Congress amended the
authorizes a recording of his song, others are free to record the same
song, so long as they pay the original composer a fee set by the law.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcompulsorylicense' class='startofrange'><primary>compulsory license</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxstatutorylicenses' class='startofrange'><primary>statutory licenses</primary></indexterm>
<para>
American law ordinarily calls this a <quote>compulsory license,</quote> but I will
refer to it as a <quote>statutory license.</quote> A statutory license is a license
of recordings so long as they paid the composer (or copyright holder)
the fee set by the statute.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxgrishamjohn' class='startofrange'><primary>Grisham, John</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This is an exception within the law of copyright. When John Grisham
writes a novel, a publisher is free to publish that novel only if
Grisham is thus set by Grisham, and copyright law ordinarily says you
have no permission to use Grisham's work except with permission of
Grisham.
-<indexterm><primary>Grisham, John</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawonmusicrecordings' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Beatles</primary></indexterm>
<para>
But the law governing recordings gives recording artists less. And
thus, in effect, the law <emphasis>subsidizes</emphasis> the recording
<!-- f10 -->
Copyright Law Revision: Hearings on S. 2499, S. 2900, H.R. 243, and
-H.R. 11794 Before the ( Joint) Committee on Patents, 60th Cong., 1st
+H.R. 11794 Before the (Joint) Committee on Patents, 60th Cong., 1st
sess., 217 (1908) (statement of Senator Reed Smoot, chairman), reprinted
in <citetitle>Legislative History of the 1909 Copyright Act</citetitle>, E. Fulton Brylawski and
Abe Goldman, eds. (South Hackensack, N.J.: Rothman Reprints, 1976).
</para></footnote>
-<indexterm><primary>Beatles</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusonrecordingindustry' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxgrishamjohn' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
While the recording industry has been quite coy about this recently,
historically it has been quite a supporter of the statutory license for
this report.</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawstatutorylicensesin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustrystatutorylicensesystemin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcompulsorylicense' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxstatutorylicenses' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
By limiting the rights musicians have, by partially pirating their
creative work, the record producers, and the public, benefit.
</section>
<section id="radio">
<title>Radio</title>
-<indexterm id='idxartistspayments1' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>artists</primary>
- <secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustryradiobroadcastand' class='startofrange'><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>radio broadcast and</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxartistsrecordingindustrypaymentsto' class='startofrange'><primary>artists</primary><secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Radio was also born of piracy.
</para>
for free, even if it must pay the composer something for the privilege
of playing the song.
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxmadonna" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Madonna</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmadonna' class='startofrange'><primary>Madonna</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This difference can be huge. Imagine you compose a piece of music.
Imagine it is your first. You own the exclusive right to authorize
<emphasis>pirate</emphasis> the value of Madonna's work without paying
her anything.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxmadonna" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxartistsrecordingindustrypaymentsto' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmadonna' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
No doubt, one might argue that, on balance, the recording artists
benefit. On average, the promotion they get is worth more than the
the choice for him or her, the law gives the radio station the right
to take something for nothing.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxartistspayments1' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustryradiobroadcastand' class='endofrange'/>
</section>
<section id="cabletv">
<title>Cable TV</title>
-<indexterm id='idxcabletv1' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>cable television</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcabletelevision' class='startofrange'><primary>cable television</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Cable TV was also born of a kind of piracy.
</para>
companies thus built their empire in part upon a <quote>piracy</quote> of the value
created by broadcasters' content.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxcabletv1' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpiracyindevelopmentofcontentindustry' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcabletelevision' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>These separate stories</emphasis> sing a
common theme. If <quote>piracy</quote> means using value from someone
<section id="piracy-i">
<title>Piracy I</title>
<indexterm><primary>Asia, commercial piracy in</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcdsforeign' class='startofrange'><primary>CDs</primary><secondary>foreign piracy of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
All across the world, but especially in Asia and Eastern Europe, there
are businesses that do nothing but take others people's copyrighted
<para>
True, these local rules have, in effect, been imposed upon these
countries. No country can be part of the world economy and choose
-<beginpage pagenum="77"/>
+<!-- PAGE BREAK 77-->
not to protect copyright internationally. We may have been born a
pirate nation, but we will not allow any other nation to have a
similar childhood.
The physics of piracy of the intangible are different from the physics of
piracy of the tangible.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcdsforeign' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This argument is still very weak. However, although copyright is a
property right of a very special sort, it <emphasis>is</emphasis> a
permission of a property owner. That is exactly what <quote>property</quote> means.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Asia, commercial piracy in</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>piracy</primary><secondary>in Asia</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>free software/open-source software (FS/OSS)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>GNU/Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Microsoft</primary><secondary>competitive strategies of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Windows</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Microsoft</primary><secondary>international software piracy of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Microsoft</primary><secondary>Windows operating system of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Finally, we could try to excuse this piracy with the argument that the
piracy actually helps the copyright owner. When the Chinese <quote>steal</quote>
Microsoft Windows, the Chinese used the free GNU/Linux operating
system, then these Chinese users would not eventually be buying
Microsoft. Without piracy, then, Microsoft would lose.
-<indexterm><primary>GNU/Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm>
-<primary>Microsoft</primary>
-<secondary>Windows operating system of</secondary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Windows</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>law</primary><secondary>databases of case reports in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
This argument, too, is somewhat true. The addiction strategy is a good
one. Many businesses practice it. Some thrive because of it. Law
so used to their service that they will want to use it and not the
other when they become lawyers (and must pay high subscription fees).
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Netscape</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Internet Explorer</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>GNU/Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Still, the argument is not terribly persuasive. We don't give the
alcoholic a defense when he steals his first beer, merely because that
what—at least ordinarily. And if the law properly balances the
rights of the copyright owner with the rights of access, then
violating the law is still wrong.
-<indexterm><primary>GNU/Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Internet Explorer</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Netscape</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 79 -->
author of his profit.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>innovation</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Fanning, Shawn</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Peer-to-peer sharing was made famous by Napster. But the inventors of
the Napster technology had not made any major technological
<indexterm><primary>Christensen, Clayton M.</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>), Shawn Fanning and crew had simply
put together components that had been developed independently.
-<indexterm><primary>Fanning, Shawn</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
The result was spontaneous combustion. Launched in July 1999,
different kinds into four types.
</para>
<orderedlist numeration="upperalpha">
-<listitem><para>
+<listitem>
+<indexterm><primary>Madonna</primary></indexterm>
+<para>
<!-- A. -->
There are some who use sharing networks as substitutes for purchasing
content. Thus, when a new Madonna CD is released, rather than buying
make it available for free. Most probably wouldn't have, but clearly
there are some who would. The latter are the target of category A:
users who download instead of purchasing.
-<indexterm><primary>Madonna</primary></indexterm>
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
<!-- B. -->
industry complains that type A sharing is a kind of <quote>theft</quote> that is
<quote>devastating</quote> the industry.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcassette' class='startofrange'><primary>cassette recording</primary><secondary>VCRs</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
While the numbers do suggest that sharing is harmful, how
harmful is harder to reckon. It has long been the recording industry's
& Young put it, <quote>Rather than exploiting this new, popular
technology, the labels fought it.</quote><footnote><para>
<!-- f10 -->
+<indexterm><primary>cassette recording</primary></indexterm>
See Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, <citetitle>Technology Evolution and the
Music Industry's Business Model Crisis</citetitle> (2003), 3. This report
describes the music industry's effort to stigmatize the budding
that its point was proved. Technology was the problem, and banning or
regulating technology was the answer.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>MTV</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Yet soon thereafter, and before Congress was given an opportunity
to enact regulation, MTV was launched, and the industry had a record
U.S. Congress, <citetitle>Copyright and Home Copying</citetitle>, 4.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcassette' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
But just because the industry was wrong before does not mean it is
wrong today. To evaluate the real threat that p2p sharing presents to
them.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcdssales' class='startofrange'><primary>CDs</primary><secondary>sales levels of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Could that be true? Could the industry as a whole be gaining because
of file sharing? Odd as that might sound, the data about CD sales
free, and yet sales revenue dropped by just 6.7 percent, then there is
a huge difference between <quote>downloading a song and stealing a CD.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcdssales' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
These are the harms—alleged and perhaps exaggerated but, let's
assume, real. What of the benefits? File sharing may impose costs on
publisher or the distributor has decided it no longer makes economic
sense <emphasis>to the company</emphasis> to make it available.
</para>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>resales of</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>books</primary><secondary>resales of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
In real space—long before the Internet—the market had a simple
<!-- PAGE BREAK 85 -->
thousands of used book and used record stores in America
today.<footnote><para>
<!-- f16 -->
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>resales of</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>books</primary><secondary>resales of</secondary></indexterm>
While there are not good estimates of the number of used record stores
in existence, in 2002, there were 7,198 used book dealers in the
United States, an increase of 20 percent since 1993. See Book Hunter
statutory licensing, they don't have to pay the copyright owner for
the content they sell.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>books</primary><secondary>out of print</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Bernstein, Leonard</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>out of print</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetbookson' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>books on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Type C sharing, then, is very much like used book stores or used
record stores. It is different, of course, because the person making
stopped, do you think that libraries and used book stores should be
shut as well?
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxbooksfreeonline1' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>free on-line releases of</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxbooksfreeonline1' class='startofrange'><primary>books</primary><secondary>free on-line releases of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Doctorow, Cory</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom (Doctorow)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, file-sharing networks enable
type D sharing to occur—the sharing of content that copyright owners
efficiencies? What is the content that otherwise would be
unavailable?</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetbookson' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
For unlike the piracy I described in the first section of this
chapter, much of the <quote>piracy</quote> that file sharing enables is plainly
legitimate rights of creators while protecting innovation. Sometimes
this has meant more rights for creators. Sometimes less.
</para>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>artists</primary>
- <secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>artists</primary><secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>composers, copyright protections of</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws2' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on copyright laws</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusonrecordingindustry2' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on recording industry</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawonmusicrecordings2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>on music recordings</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawstatutorylicensesin2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>statutory licenses in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>radio</primary><secondary>music recordings played on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>artist remuneration in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>copyright protections in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>radio broadcast and</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>statutory licenses</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>composer's rights vs. producers' rights in</primary></indexterm>
<para>
So, as we've seen, when <quote>mechanical reproduction</quote> threatened the
interests of composers, Congress balanced the rights of composers
creativity it broadcast), Congress rejected their claim. An indirect
benefit was enough.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxcabletv2' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>cable television</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcabletv2' class='startofrange'><primary>cable television</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Cable TV followed the pattern of record albums. When the courts
rejected the claim that cable broadcasters had to pay for the content
companies the right to the content, so long as they paid the statutory
price.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusonrecordingindustry2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 88 -->
<emphasis>compensation</emphasis> without giving the past
(broadcasters) control over the future (cable).
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawonmusicrecordings2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawstatutorylicensesin2' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm startref='idxcabletv2' class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm><primary>Betamax</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxbetamax' class='startofrange'><primary>Betamax</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcassettevcrs1' class='startofrange'><primary>cassette recording</primary><secondary>VCRs</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
In the same year that Congress struck this balance, two major
producers and distributors of film content filed a lawsuit against
infringement of its customers. It should therefore, Disney and
Universal claimed, be partially liable for that infringement.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
There was something to Disney's and Universal's claim. Sony did
decide to design its machine to make it very simple to record television
not, and for that, Disney and Universal wanted to hold it responsible
for the architecture it chose.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws3' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on copyright laws</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on VCR technology</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
MPAA president Jack Valenti became the studios' most vocal
champion. Valenti called VCRs <quote>tapeworms.</quote> He warned, <quote>When there are
<!-- f19 -->
Copyright Infringements (Audio and Video Recorders), 475.
</para></footnote>
-Indeed, as surveys would later show,
+Indeed, as surveys would later show, 45
percent of VCR owners had movie libraries of ten videos or more<footnote><para>
<!-- f20 -->
<citetitle>Universal City Studios, Inc</citetitle>. v. <citetitle>Sony Corp. of America</citetitle>, 480 F. Supp. 429,
</para></footnote>
— a use the Court would later hold was not <quote>fair.</quote> By
<quote>allowing VCR owners to copy freely by the means of an exemption from
-copyright infringementwithout creating a mechanism to compensate
-copyrightowners,</quote> Valenti testified, Congress would <quote>take from the
+copyright infringement without creating a mechanism to compensate
+copyright owners,</quote> Valenti testified, Congress would <quote>take from the
owners the very essence of their property: the exclusive right to
control who may use their work, that is, who may copy it and thereby
profit from its reproduction.</quote><footnote><para>
of Jack Valenti).
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxbetamax' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
It took eight years for this case to be resolved by the Supreme
Court. In the interim, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws3' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Congress was asked to respond to the Supreme Court's decision. But as
with the plea of recording artists about radio broadcasts, Congress
</tbody>
</tgroup>
</informaltable>
-
+<indexterm startref='idxcassettevcrs1' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
In each case throughout our history, a new technology changed the
way content was distributed.<footnote><para>
interests at stake.
<!-- PAGE BREAK 91 -->
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Disney, Walt</primary></indexterm>
<para>
When you think across these examples, and the other examples that
make up the first four chapters of this section, this balance makes
controlled film? Should every cover band have to hire a lawyer to get
permission to record a song?
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Supreme Court, U.S.</primary><secondary>on balance of interests in copyright law</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
We could answer yes to each of these questions, but our tradition
has answered no. In our tradition, as the Supreme Court has stated,
table, and putting it in my backyard? What is the thing I am taking
then?
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Jefferson, Thomas</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The point is not just about the thingness of picnic tables versus
ideas, though that's an important difference. The point instead is that
Ellery Bergh, eds., 1903), 330, 333–34.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>property rights</primary><secondary>intangibility of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The exceptions to free use are ideas and expressions within the
reach of the law of patent and copyright, and a few other domains that
<!-- PAGE BREAK 96 -->
<chapter label="6" id="founders">
<title>CHAPTER SIX: Founders</title>
-<indexterm><primary>Henry V</primary></indexterm>
+<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 id='idxbooksenglishlaw' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>English copyright law developed for</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Henry V</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Shakespeare, William</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxromeoandjulietshakespeare' class='startofrange'><primary>Romeo and Juliet (Shakespeare)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>William Shakespeare</emphasis> wrote
<citetitle>Romeo and Juliet</citetitle> in 1595. The play was first
Henry V: <quote>I liked it, but Shakespeare is so full of
clichés.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Conger</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxtonsonjacob' class='startofrange'><primary>Tonson, Jacob</primary></indexterm>
<para>
In 1774, almost 180 years after <citetitle>Romeo and Juliet</citetitle> was written, the
<quote>copy-right</quote> for the work was still thought by many to be the exclusive
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
knows a little about copyright law. The better-known year in the
works already published by 1710 would get a single term of twenty-one
additional years.<footnote><para>
<!-- f3 -->
+<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
As Siva Vaidhyanathan nicely argues, it is erroneous to call this a
<quote>copyright law.</quote> See Vaidhyanathan, <citetitle>Copyrights and Copywrongs</citetitle>, 40.
-<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote> Under this law, <citetitle>Romeo and Juliet</citetitle> should have been
free in 1731. So why was there any issue about it still being under
Tonson's control in 1774?
</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>
was—indeed, no one had. At the time the English passed the
published. But after it expired, there was no positive law that said
that the publishers, or <quote>Stationers,</quote> had an exclusive right to print
books.
-<indexterm><primary>Licensing Act (1662)</primary></indexterm>
</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
take Shakespeare's play without his, or his estate's, permission? What
reason is there to allow someone else to <quote>steal</quote> Shakespeare's work?
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Statute of Anne (1710)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The answer comes in two parts. We first need to see something special
about the notion of <quote>copyright</quote> that existed at the time of the
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 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
<quote>The publishers … had as much concern for authors as a cattle
rancher has for cattle.</quote><footnote><para>
<!-- f6 -->
+<indexterm><primary>Patterson, Raymond</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
Lyman Ray Patterson, <quote>Free Speech, Copyright, and Fair Use,</quote> <citetitle>Vanderbilt
Law Review</citetitle> 40 (1987): 28. For a wonderfully compelling account, see
Vaidhyanathan, 37–48.
-<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
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>
Donaldson was an outsider to the London Conger. He began his
career in Edinburgh in 1750. The focus of his business was inexpensive
<!-- f9 -->
Ibid., 93.
</para></footnote>
-<indexterm><primary>Boswell, James</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Erskine, Andrew</primary></indexterm>
</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
of the supposed common law right of Literary
Property.</quote><footnote><para>
<!-- f10 -->
+<indexterm><primary>Patterson, Raymond</primary></indexterm>
Lyman Ray Patterson, <citetitle>Copyright in Historical Perspective</citetitle>, 167 (quoting
Borwell).
</para></footnote>
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>
Millar was a bookseller who in 1729 had purchased the rights to James
(1983): 1152.
</para></footnote>
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxmansfield2" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Mansfield, William Murray, Lord</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmansfieldwilliammurraylord2' class='startofrange'><primary>Mansfield, William Murray, Lord</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Astonishingly to modern lawyers, one of the greatest judges in English
history, Lord Mansfield, agreed with the booksellers. Whatever
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
believed, Britain would mature from the controlled culture that the
Crown coveted to the free culture that we inherited.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxmansfield2" class='endofrange'/>
+<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='idxbooksenglishlaw' 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 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
on a tiny television set in the corner of the room. How could it hurt?
Groening was happy to have it in the film, but he told Else to contact
Gracie Films, the company that produces the program.
-<indexterm><primary>Gracie Films</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<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.
Else called Fox and told them about the clip in the corner of the one
room shot of the film. Matt Groening had already given permission,
Else said. He was just confirming the permission with Fox.
-<indexterm><primary>Gracie Films</primary></indexterm>
</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>
Else didn't have the money to buy the right to replay what was playing
on the television backstage at the San Francisco Opera. To reproduce
very last minute before the film was to be released, Else digitally
replaced the shot with a clip from another film that he had worked on,
<citetitle>The Day After Trinity</citetitle>, from ten years before.
-<indexterm><primary>San Francisco Opera</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Day After Trinity, The</primary></indexterm>
</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 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. -->
to exhaustion on a shoestring, the last thing I wanted was to risk
legal trouble, even nuisance legal trouble, and even to defend a
principle.
-<indexterm><primary>Lucas, George</primary></indexterm>
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
<!-- 3. -->
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">
<title>CHAPTER EIGHT: Transformers</title>
<indexterm><primary>Allen, Paul</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxalbenalex1' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Alben, Alex</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxalbenalex1' class='startofrange'><primary>Alben, Alex</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Microsoft</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>In 1993</emphasis>, Alex Alben was a lawyer
investing in new technology for delivering entertainment in
anticipation of the power of networks.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxartistsretrospective' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>artists</primary>
- <secondary>retrospective compilations on</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxartistsretrospective' class='startofrange'><primary>artists</primary><secondary>retrospective compilations on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcdroms' class='startofrange'><primary>CD-ROMs, film clips used in</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Alben had a special interest in new technology. He was intrigued by
the emerging market for CD-ROM technology—not to distribute
publicity—rights an artist has to control the commercial
exploitation of his image. But these rights, too, burden <quote>Rip, Mix,
Burn</quote> creativity, as this chapter evinces.
-<indexterm>
-<primary>artists</primary>
-<secondary>publicity rights on images of</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>artists</primary><secondary>publicity rights on images of</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Alben, Alex</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
</para>
year, how long would it take someone else? And how much creativity is
never made just because the costs of clearing the rights are so high?
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcdroms' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm startref='idxartistsretrospective' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
These costs are the burdens of a kind of regulation. Put on a
</chapter>
<chapter label="9" id="collectors">
<title>CHAPTER NINE: Collectors</title>
-<indexterm id='idxarchivesdigital1' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>archives, digital</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxarchivesdigital1' class='startofrange'><primary>archives, digital</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>bots</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>In April 1996</emphasis>, millions of
again, once every two months, these bits of code took copies of the
Internet and stored them.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Way Back Machine</primary></indexterm>
<para>
By October 2001, the bots had collected more than five years of
copies. And at a small announcement in Berkeley, California, the
enter a Web page, and see all of its copies going back to 1996, as
well as when those pages changed.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxorwellgeorge' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Orwell, George</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxorwellgeorge' class='startofrange'><primary>Orwell, George</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This is the thing about the Internet that Orwell would have
appreciated. In the dystopia described in <citetitle>1984</citetitle>, old newspapers were
library—constantly updated, without any reliable memory.
</para>
<indexterm startref='idxorwellgeorge' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Way Back Machine</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Until the Way Back Machine, at least. With the Way Back Machine, and
the Internet Archive underlying it, you can see what the Internet
Carnegie of the Internet. By December of 2002, the archive had over 10
billion pages, and it was growing at about a billion pages a month.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Library of Congress</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Television Archive</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Vanderbilt University</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Way Back Machine</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>libraries</primary><secondary>archival function of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxnewscoverage2' class='startofrange'><primary>news coverage</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The Way Back Machine is the largest archive of human knowledge in
human history. At the end of 2002, it held <quote>two hundred and thirty
</para>
<blockquote>
<indexterm><primary>Quayle, Dan</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>60 Minutes</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Do you remember when Dan Quayle was interacting with Murphy Brown?
Remember that back and forth surreal experience of a politician
impossible. … Those materials are almost unfindable. …
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm><primary>newspapers</primary><secondary>archives of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Why is that? Why is it that the part of our culture that is recorded
in newspapers remains perpetually accessible, while the part that is
once the copyright expired, so that others might access and copy the
work.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Library of Congress</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>films</primary><secondary>archive of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
These rules applied to film as well. But in 1915, the Library
of Congress made an exception for film. Film could be copyrighted so
Doug Herrick, <quote>Toward a National Film Collection: Motion Pictures at
the Library of Congress,</quote> <citetitle>Film Library Quarterly</citetitle> 13 nos. 2–3
(1980): 5; Anthony Slide, <citetitle>Nitrate Won't Wait: A History of Film
-Preservation in the United States</citetitle> ( Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland &
+Preservation in the United States</citetitle> (Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland &
Co., 1992), 36.
</para></footnote>
</para>
demand them. The content of this part of American culture is
practically invisible to anyone who would look.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks of</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Kahle was eager to correct this. Before September 11, 2001, he and
<!-- PAGE BREAK 123 -->
events of that day.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Movie Archive</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>archive.org</primary>
- <seealso>Internet Archive</seealso>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>archive.org</primary><seealso>Internet Archive</seealso></indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxnewscoverage2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>films</primary><secondary>archive of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Internet Archive</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Duck and Cover film</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>ephemeral films</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Prelinger, Rick</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Kahle had the same idea with film. Working with Rick Prelinger, whose
archive of film includes close to 45,000 <quote>ephemeral films</quote> (meaning
the content can continue to inform even if that information is no
longer sold.
</para>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>out of print</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>books</primary><secondary>out of print</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The same has always been true about books. A book goes out of print
very quickly (the average today is after about a year<footnote><para>
<!-- f3 -->
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>out of print</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>books</primary><secondary>out of print</secondary></indexterm>
Dave Barns, <quote>Fledgling Career in Antique Books: Woodstock Landlord,
Bar Owner Starts a New Chapter by Adopting Business,</quote> <citetitle>Chicago Tribune</citetitle>,
5 September 1997, at Metro Lake 1L. Of books published between 1927
Kahle describes,
</para>
<blockquote>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>total number of</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>books</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
the moon, and the invention of the printing press.
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm><primary>Disney, Walt</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Kahle is not the only librarian. The Internet Archive is not the only
archive. But Kahle and the Internet Archive suggest what the future of
running the MPAA, Valenti has established himself as perhaps the most
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>Universal Pictures</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Warner Brothers</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The MPAA is the American branch of the international Motion Picture
Association. It was formed in 1922 as a trade association whose goal
in the United States: Walt Disney, Sony Pictures Entertainment, MGM,
Paramount Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox, Universal Studios, and
Warner Brothers.
-<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>Universal Pictures</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Warner Brothers</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 128 -->
owner. He is effectively arguing for a change in our Constitution
itself.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxjeffersonthomas' class='startofrange'><primary>Jefferson, Thomas</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Arguing for a change in our Constitution is not necessarily wrong.
There was much in our original Constitution that was plainly wrong.
did they require that for creative property there must be a public
domain?
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxjeffersonthomas' class='endofrange'/>
+
<para>
To answer this question, we need to get some perspective on the
history of these <quote>creative property</quote> rights, and the control that they
but whether institutions designed to assure that artists get paid need
also control how culture develops.
</para>
+<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>
+<indexterm id='idxlawasconstraintmodality' class='startofrange'><primary>law</primary><secondary>as constraint modality</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 132 -->
</para>
<figure id="fig-1331">
<title>How four different modalities of regulation interact to support or weaken the right or regulation.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1331.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1331.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
+<indexterm><primary>Madonna</primary></indexterm>
<para>
At the center of this picture is a regulated dot: the individual or
group that is the target of regulation, or the holder of a right. (In
state. The mark of the difference is not the severity of the rule, but
the source of the enforcement.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>market constraints</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm
id='idxmarketconstraints' class='startofrange'><primary>market constraints</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The market is a third type of constraint. Its constraint is effected
through conditions: You can do X if you pay Y; you'll be paid M if you
constraint. If a $500 airplane ticket stands between you and a flight
to New York, it is the market that enforces this constraint.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawasexpostregulationmodality' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxlawasconstraintmodality' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmarketconstraints' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxlawasconstraintmodality2' class='startofrange'><primary>law</primary><secondary>as constraint modality</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 134 -->
most significant, and any regulator (whether controlling or freeing)
must consider how these four in particular interact.
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxdrivespeed" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>driving speed, constraints on</primary>
-</indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>architecture, constraint effected through</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>market constraints</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>norms, regulatory influence of</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxdrivingspeedconstraintson' class='startofrange'><primary>driving speed, constraints on</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxspeedingconstraintson' class='startofrange'><primary>speeding, constraints on</primary></indexterm>
<para>
So, for example, consider the <quote>freedom</quote> to drive a car at a high
speed. That freedom is in part restricted by laws: speed limits that
limit, for example—so as to decrease the attractiveness of fast
driving.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxdrivespeed" class='endofrange'/>
-
+<indexterm startref='idxdrivingspeedconstraintson' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxspeedingconstraintson' class='endofrange'/>
<figure id="fig-1361">
<title>Law has a special role in affecting the three.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1361.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1361.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
+
</figure>
<indexterm><primary>architecture, constraint effected through</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<indexterm><primary>market constraints</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxlawasconstraintmodality2' class='endofrange'/>
<section id="hollywood">
<title>Why Hollywood Is Right</title>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightfourregulatorymodalitieson' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>four regulatory modalities on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The most obvious point that this model reveals is just why, or just
how, Hollywood is right. The copyright warriors have rallied Congress
</para>
<figure id="fig-1371">
<title>Copyright's regulation before the Internet.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1331.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1331.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
+
</figure>
-<indexterm><primary>market constraints</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>norms, regulatory influence of</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxarchitectureconstrainteffectedthrough' class='startofrange'><primary>architecture, constraint effected through</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>law</primary><secondary>as constraint modality</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxnormsregulatoryinfluenceof2' class='startofrange'><primary>norms, regulatory influence of</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 136 -->
There is balance between law, norms, market, and architecture. The law
of our society (before the Internet, at least) had no problem with
this form of infringement.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetcopyrightregulatorybalancelostwith' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>copyright regulatory balance lost with</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>peer-to-peer (p2p) file sharing</primary><secondary>regulatory balance lost in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>market constraints</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>MP3s</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Enter the Internet, or, more precisely, technologies such as MP3s and
p2p sharing. Now the constraint of architecture changes dramatically,
happy balance (for the warriors, at least) of life before the Internet
becomes an effective state of anarchy after the Internet.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxarchitectureconstrainteffectedthrough' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxnormsregulatoryinfluenceof2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>technology</primary><secondary>established industries threatened by changes in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Thus the sense of, and justification for, the warriors' response.
Technology has changed, the warriors say, and the effect of this
</para>
<figure id="fig-1381">
<title>effective state of anarchy after the Internet.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1381.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1381.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
+
</figure>
+<indexterm><primary>Commerce, U.S. Department of</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxregulationasestablishmentprotectionism' class='startofrange'><primary>regulation</primary><secondary>as establishment protectionism</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Neither this analysis nor the conclusions that follow are new to the
warriors. Indeed, in a <quote>White Paper</quote> prepared by the Commerce
develop code to protect copyrighted material, and (4) educators should
educate kids to better protect copyright.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxfreeculturefourmodalitiesofconstrainton' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxregulationfourmodalitiesof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>farming</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>steel industry</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This mixed strategy is just what copyright needed—if it was to
crop. Unions have no hesitation appealing to the government to bail
them out when imports (market) wipe out the U.S. steel industry.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightfourregulatorymodalitieson' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetcopyrightregulatorybalancelostwith' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Brown, John Seely</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Thus, there's nothing wrong or surprising in the content industry's
campaign to protect itself from the harmful consequences of a
on the content industry's way of doing business, or as John Seely
Brown describes it, its <quote>architecture of revenue.</quote>
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>railroad industry</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>advertising</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>television</primary><secondary>advertising on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>commercials</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>camera technology</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>digital cameras</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Kodak cameras</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>railroad industry</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>remote channel changers</primary></indexterm>
<para>
But just because a particular interest asks for government support, it
doesn't follow that support should be granted. And just because
<emphasis>for the purpose of</emphasis> protecting the railroads?
Closer to the subject of this book, remote channel changers have
weakened the <quote>stickiness</quote> of television advertising (if a boring
-commercial comes on the TV, the remote makes it easy to surf ), and it
+commercial comes on the TV, the remote makes it easy to surf), and it
may well be that this change has weakened the television advertising
market. But does anyone believe we should regulate remotes to
reinforce commercial television? (Maybe by limiting them to function
only once a second, or to switch to only ten channels within an hour?)
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxfreemarkettechnologicalchangesin' class='startofrange'><primary>free market, technological changes in</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Brezhnev, Leonid</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>FM radio</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>radio</primary><secondary>FM spectrum of</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Gates, Bill</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>market competition</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>RCA</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The obvious answer to these obviously rhetorical questions is no.
In a free society, with a free market, supported by free enterprise and
changing technology, are changes that preserve the incentives and
opportunities for innovation and change.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>First Amendment to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>First Amendment</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>speech, freedom of</primary><secondary>constitutional guarantee of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
In the context of laws regulating speech—which include,
obviously, copyright law—that duty is even stronger. When the
of speech, it should ask— carefully—whether such
regulation is justified.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxregulationasestablishmentprotectionism' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfreemarkettechnologicalchangesin' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
My argument just now, however, has nothing to do with whether
<!-- PAGE BREAK 140 -->
<para>
Here's the metaphor that will capture the argument to follow.
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxddt" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>DDT</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmllerpaulhermann' class='startofrange'><primary>Müller, Paul Hermann</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxddt' class='startofrange'><primary>DDT</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinsecticideenvironmentalconsequencesof' class='startofrange'><primary>insecticide, environmental consequences of</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfarming' class='startofrange'><primary>farming</primary></indexterm>
<para>
In 1873, the chemical DDT was first synthesized. In 1948, Swiss
chemist Paul Hermann Müller won the Nobel Prize for his work
demonstrating the insecticidal properties of DDT. By the 1950s, the
insecticide was widely used around the world to kill disease-carrying
pests. It was also used to increase farm production.
-<indexterm><primary>Müller, Paul Hermann</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
No one doubts that killing disease-carrying pests or increasing crop
important and valuable and probably saved lives, possibly millions.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Carson, Rachel</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Silent Sprint (Carson)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Silent Spring (Carson)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxenvironmentalism' class='startofrange'><primary>environmentalism</primary></indexterm>
<para>
But in 1962, Rachel Carson published <citetitle>Silent Spring</citetitle>, which argued that
DDT, whatever its primary benefits, was also having unintended
when considering the other, more environmentally friendly ways to
solve the problems that DDT was meant to solve.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxmllerpaulhermann' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Boyle, James</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawinnovativefreedombalancedwithfaircompensationin2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>innovative freedom balanced with fair compensation in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
It is to this image precisely that Duke University law professor James
Boyle appeals when he argues that we need an <quote>environmentalism</quote> for
authors. It is an environment of creativity that we seek, and we
should be aware of our actions' effects on the environment.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxfarming' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
My argument, in the balance of this chapter, tries to map exactly
this effect. No doubt the technology of the Internet has had a dramatic
generally missed, the net effect of this massive increase in protection
will be devastating to the environment for creativity.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawinnovativefreedombalancedwithfaircompensationin2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
In a line: To kill a gnat, we are spraying DDT with consequences
for free culture that will be far more devastating than that this gnat will
be lost.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxddt" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxddt' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinsecticideenvironmentalconsequencesof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxenvironmentalism' class='endofrange'/>
</section>
<section id="beginnings">
<title>Beginnings</title>
+<indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>on creative property</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxconstitutionuscopyrightpurposeestablishedin' class='startofrange'><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>copyright purpose established in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxconstitutionusprogressclauseof' class='startofrange'><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>Progress Clause of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>constitutional purpose of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>duration of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcreativepropertyconstitutionaltraditionon2' class='startofrange'><primary>creative property</primary><secondary>constitutional tradition on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxprogressclause' class='startofrange'><primary>Progress Clause</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>duration of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
America copied English copyright law. Actually, we copied and improved
English copyright law. Our Constitution makes the purpose of <quote>creative
property</quote> rights clear; its express limitations reinforce the English
aim to avoid overly powerful publishers.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusinconstitutionalprogressclause' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>in constitutional Progress Clause</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The power to establish <quote>creative property</quote> rights is granted to
Congress in a way that, for our Constitution, at least, is very
purpose, and its purpose is a public one, not the purpose of enriching
publishers, nor even primarily the purpose of rewarding authors.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusinconstitutionalprogressclause' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawasprotectionofcreators' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>as protection of creators</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawhistoryofamerican' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>history of American</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The Progress Clause expressly limits the term of copyrights. As we saw
in chapter <xref xrefstyle="select: labelnumber" linkend="founders"/>,
English, the framers reinforced that objective, by requiring that
copyrights extend <quote>to Authors</quote> only.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Senate, U.S.</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>structural checks and balances of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>electoral college</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The design of the Progress Clause reflects something about the
Constitution's design in general. To avoid a problem, the framers
the constitutional frame, structured to prevent otherwise inevitable
concentrations of power.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxconstitutionusprogressclauseof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxprogressclause' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
I doubt the framers would recognize the regulation we call <quote>copyright</quote>
today. The scope of that regulation is far beyond anything they ever
<quote>copyright</quote> in context: We need to see how it has changed in the 210
years since they first struck its design.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxconstitutionuscopyrightpurposeestablishedin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcreativepropertyconstitutionaltraditionon2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawasprotectionofcreators' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>four regulatory modalities on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Some of these changes come from the law: some in light of changes
in technology, and some in light of changes in technology given a
</para>
<figure id="fig-1441">
<title>Copyright's regulation before the Internet.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1331.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1331.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
We will end here:
</para>
<figure id="fig-1442">
<title><quote>Copyright</quote> today.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1442.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1442.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
Let me explain how.
</section>
<section id="lawduration">
<title>Law: Duration</title>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightdurationof4' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>duration of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws5' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on copyright laws</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightact' class='startofrange'><primary>Copyright Act (1790)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>creative property</primary><secondary>common law protections of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpublicdomainbalanceofuscontentin' class='startofrange'><primary>public domain</primary><secondary>balance of U.S. content in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
When the first Congress enacted laws to protect creative property, it
faced the same uncertainty about the status of creative property that
uncertainty would make it hard for publishers to rely upon a public
domain to reprint and distribute works.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Statute of Anne (1710)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxlawfederalvsstate' class='startofrange'><primary>law</primary><secondary>federal vs. state</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
That uncertainty ended after Congress passed legislation granting
copyrights. Because federal law overrides any contrary state law,
that the copyrights for all English works expired, a federal statute
meant that any state copyrights expired as well.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightrenewabilityof' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>renewability of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
In 1790, Congress enacted the first copyright law. It created a
federal copyright and secured that copyright for fourteen years. If
opt to renew the copyright for another fourteen years. If he did not
renew the copyright, his work passed into the public domain.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws5' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
While there were many works created in the United States in the first
ten years of the Republic, only 5 percent of the works were actually
with the option of renewal for an additional fourteen years. Copyright
Act of May 31, 1790, §1, 1 stat. 124. </para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightact' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxlawfederalvsstate' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This system of renewal was a crucial part of the American system
of copyright. It assured that the maximum terms of copyright would be
<citetitle>University of Chicago Law Review</citetitle> 70 (2003): 471, 498–501, and
accompanying figures. </para></footnote>
</para>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>out of print</secondary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>resales of</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxpublicdomainbalanceofuscontentin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>books</primary><secondary>resales of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>books</primary><secondary>out of print</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Even today, this structure would make sense. Most creative work
has an actual commercial life of just a couple of years. Most books fall
is to sell the books as used books; that use—because it does not
involve publication—is effectively free.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws6' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on copyright laws</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressuscopyrighttermsextendedby' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>copyright terms extended by</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawtermextensionsin' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>term extensions in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
In the first hundred years of the Republic, the term of copyright was
changed once. In 1831, the term was increased from a maximum of 28
the term increased once again. In 1909, Congress extended the renewal
term of 14 years to 28 years, setting a maximum term of 56 years.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxsonnybonocopyrighttermextensionactctea' class='startofrange'><primary>Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) (1998)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpublicdomainfuturepatentsvsfuturecopyrightsin' class='startofrange'><primary>public domain</primary><secondary>future patents vs. future copyrights in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Then, beginning in 1962, Congress started a practice that has defined
copyright law since. Eleven times in the last forty years, Congress
And in 1998, in the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, Congress
extended the term of existing and future copyrights by twenty years.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>patents</primary><secondary>in public domain</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The effect of these extensions is simply to toll, or delay, the passing
of works into the public domain. This latest extension means that the
public domain, zero copyrights will pass into the public domain by virtue
of the expiration of a copyright term.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxsonnybonocopyrighttermextensionactctea' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The effect of these extensions has been exacerbated by another,
little-noticed change in the copyright law. Remember I said that the
under protection would be those that had some continuing commercial
value.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) (1998)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>of natural authors vs. corporations</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>corporations</primary><secondary>copyright terms for</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The United States abandoned this sensible system in 1976. For
all works created after 1978, there was only one copyright term—the
that terms be <quote>limited,</quote> we have no evidence that anything will limit
them.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawhistoryofamerican' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpublicdomainfuturepatentsvsfuturecopyrightsin' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The effect of these changes on the average duration of copyright is
dramatic. In 1973, more than 85 percent of copyright owners failed to
Posner, <quote>Indefinitely Renewable Copyright,</quote> loc. cit.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightdurationof4' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightrenewabilityof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws6' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressuscopyrighttermsextendedby' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawtermextensionsin' class='endofrange'/>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 147 -->
</section>
<section id="lawscope">
<title>Law: Scope</title>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightscopeof' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>scope of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The <quote>scope</quote> of a copyright is the range of rights granted by the law.
The scope of American copyright has changed dramatically. Those
changes are not necessarily bad. But we should understand the extent
of the changes if we're to keep this debate in context.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>on republishing vs. transformation of original work</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxderivativeworkshistoricalshiftincopyrightcoverageof' class='startofrange'><primary>derivative works</primary><secondary>historical shift in copyright coverage of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
In 1790, that scope was very narrow. Copyright covered only <quote>maps,
charts, and books.</quote> That means it didn't cover, for example, music or
more broadly, and protects works that are based in a significant way
on the initial creative work.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightmarkingof' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>marking of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxformalities' class='startofrange'><primary>formalities</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawregistrationrequirementof' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>registration requirement of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
At the same time that the scope of copyright has expanded, procedural
limitations on the right have been relaxed. I've already described the
works be deposited with the government before a copyright could be
secured.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxderivativeworkshistoricalshiftincopyrightcoverageof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The reason for the registration requirement was the sensible
understanding that for most works, no copyright was required. Again,
somewhere so that it could be copied by others without locating the
original author.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>European</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
All of these <quote>formalities</quote> were abolished in the American system when
we decided to follow European copyright law. There is no requirement
a ©; and the copyright exists whether or not you actually make a
copy available for others to copy.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightmarkingof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxformalities' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawregistrationrequirementof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Consider a practical example to understand the scope of these
differences.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightact2' class='startofrange'><primary>Copyright Act (1790)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
If, in 1790, you wrote a book and you were one of the 5 percent who
actually copyrighted that book, then the copyright law protected you
regulation of a tiny proportion of a tiny part of the creative market in
the United States—publishers.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawonrepublishingvstransformationoforiginalwork2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>on republishing vs. transformation of original work</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxderivativeworkspiracyvs3' class='startofrange'><primary>derivative works</primary><secondary>piracy vs.</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpiracyderivativeworkvs3' class='startofrange'><primary>piracy</primary><secondary>derivative work vs.</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 149 -->
The act left other creators totally unregulated. If I copied your poem
creative activities remained free, while the activities of publishers
were restrained.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightact2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Today the story is very different: If you write a book, your book is
automatically protected. Indeed, not just your book. Every e-mail,
right to your writings, but an exclusive right to your writings
and a large proportion of the writings inspired by them.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxderivativeworkspiracyvs3' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
It is this derivative right that would seem most bizarre to our
framers, though it has become second nature to us. Initially, this
</para></footnote>
These two different uses of my creative work are treated the same.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxpiracyderivativeworkvs3' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Disney, Walt</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Mickey Mouse</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This again may seem right to you. If I wrote a book, then why should
you be able to write a movie that takes my story and makes money from
simply to make clear that this expansion is a significant change from
the rights originally granted.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightscopeof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawonrepublishingvstransformationoforiginalwork2' class='endofrange'/>
</section>
<section id="lawreach">
<title>Law and Architecture: Reach</title>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawcopiesascoreissueof' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>copies as core issue of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawscopeof' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>scope of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Whereas originally the law regulated only publishers, the change in
copyright's scope means that the law today regulates publishers, users,
102) is that if there is a copy, there is a right.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Valenti, Jack</primary><secondary>on creative property rights</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcreativepropertyotherpropertyrightsvs2' class='startofrange'><primary>creative property</primary><secondary>other property rights vs.</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 151 -->
<quote>Copies.</quote> That certainly sounds like the obvious thing for
law. More precisely, they should not <emphasis>always</emphasis> be
the trigger for copyright law.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawcopiesascoreissueof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This is perhaps the central claim of this book, so let me take this
very slowly so that the point is not easily missed. My claim is that the
current reach of copyright was never contemplated, much less chosen,
by the legislators who enacted copyright law.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawscopeof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcreativepropertyotherpropertyrightsvs2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
-We can see this point abstractly by beginning with this largely
+We can see this point abstractly by beginning with this largely
empty circle.
</para>
<figure id="fig-1521">
<title>All potential uses of a book.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1521.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1521.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
-<indexterm id='idxbooksusetypes' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>three types of uses of</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxbooksthreetypesofusesof' class='startofrange'><primary>books</primary><secondary>three types of uses of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawcopiesascoreissueof2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>copies as core issue of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetcopyrightapplicabilityalteredbytechnologyof' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>copyright applicability altered by technology of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxtechnologycopyrightintentalteredby' class='startofrange'><primary>technology</primary><secondary>copyright intent altered by</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxderivativeworkspiracyvs4' class='startofrange'><primary>derivative works</primary><secondary>piracy vs.</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpiracyderivativeworkvs4' class='startofrange'><primary>piracy</primary><secondary>derivative work vs.</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 152 -->
Think about a book in real space, and imagine this circle to represent
</para>
<figure id="fig-1531">
<title>Examples of unregulated uses of a book.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1531.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1531.svg" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
Obviously, however, some uses of a copyrighted book are regulated
paradigmatic use properly regulated by copyright regulation (see first
diagram on next page).
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxderivativeworkspiracyvs4' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpiracyderivativeworkvs4' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxfairuse' class='startofrange'><primary>fair use</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawfairuseand2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>fair use and</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Finally, there is a tiny sliver of otherwise regulated copying uses
that remain unregulated because the law considers these <quote>fair uses.</quote>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 153 -->
<figure id="fig-1541">
<title>Republishing stands at the core of this circle of possible uses of a copyrighted work.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1541.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1541.png" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
+<indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>First Amendment to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>First Amendment</primary></indexterm>
<para>
These are uses that themselves involve copying, but which the law
treats as unregulated because public policy demands that they remain
</para>
<figure id="fig-1542">
<title>Unregulated copying considered <quote>fair uses.</quote></title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1542.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1542.png" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para> </para>
<figure id="fig-1551">
<title>Uses that before were presumptively unregulated are now presumptively regulated.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1551.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1551.png" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightusagerestrictionsattachedto' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>usage restrictions attached to</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 154 -->
In real space, then, the possible uses of a book are divided into three
sorts: (1) unregulated uses, (2) regulated uses, and (3) regulated uses that
are nonetheless deemed <quote>fair</quote> regardless of the copyright owner's views.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxbooksusetypes' class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>on Internet</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxbooksthreetypesofusesof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxbooksoninternet' class='startofrange'><primary>books</primary><secondary>on Internet</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetbookson2' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>books on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>fair use</primary><secondary>Internet burdens on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Enter the Internet—a distributed, digital network where every use
of a copyrighted work produces a copy.<footnote><para>
exclusively to category 3, fair uses, to bear the burden of this
shift.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxfairuse' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawfairuseand2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
So let's be very specific to make this general point clear. Before the
Internet, if you purchased a book and read it ten times, there would
use—reading— could be regulated by copyright law because
none of those uses produced a copy.
</para>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>on Internet</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxebooks' class='startofrange'><primary>e-books</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxderivativeworkstechnologicaldevelopmentsand' class='startofrange'><primary>derivative works</primary><secondary>technological developments and</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
But the same book as an e-book is effectively governed by a different
set of rules. Now if the copyright owner says you may read the book
allowed our policy here to shift. Unregulated uses were an important
part of free culture before the Internet.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawonrepublishingvstransformationoforiginalwork3' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>on republishing vs. transformation of original work</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Second, this shift is especially troubling in the context of
transformative uses of creative content. Again, we can all understand
is extraordinarily troubling with respect to transformative uses of
creative work.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxfairuseinternetburdenson' class='startofrange'><primary>fair use</primary><secondary>Internet burdens on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawfairuseand3' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>fair use and</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxderivativeworksfairusevs' class='startofrange'><primary>derivative works</primary><secondary>fair use vs.</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Third, this shift from category 1 to category 2 puts an extraordinary
read was effectively protected before because reading was not
regulated.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawcopiesascoreissueof2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetcopyrightapplicabilityalteredbytechnologyof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxtechnologycopyrightintentalteredby' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxderivativeworkstechnologicaldevelopmentsand' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawonrepublishingvstransformationoforiginalwork3' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This point about fair use is totally ignored, even by advocates for
free culture. We have been cornered into arguing that our rights
presumptively regulated, then the protections of fair use are not
enough.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxadvertising2' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>advertising</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightusagerestrictionsattachedto' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxbooksoninternet' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetbookson2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxebooks' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfairuseinternetburdenson' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawfairuseand3' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxderivativeworksfairusevs' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxvideopipeline' class='startofrange'><primary>Video Pipeline</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxadvertising' class='startofrange'><primary>advertising</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfilmindustrytraileradvertisementsof' class='startofrange'><primary>film industry</primary><secondary>trailer advertisements of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The case of Video Pipeline is a good example. Video Pipeline was
in the business of making <quote>trailer</quote> advertisements for movies available
before you buy the book, so, too, you would be able to sample a bit
from the movie on-line before you bought it.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxdisneyinc2' class='startofrange'><primary>Disney, Inc.</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>fair use and</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawcopiesascoreissueof3' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>copies as core issue of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfairuselegalintimidationtacticsagainst2' class='startofrange'><primary>fair use</primary><secondary>legal intimidation tactics against</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
In 1998, Video Pipeline informed Disney and other film distributors
that it intended to distribute the trailers through the Internet
lawsuit to ask the court to declare that these rights were in fact
their rights.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxadvertising' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfilmindustrytraileradvertisementsof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightusagerestrictionsattachedto2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>usage restrictions attached to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitswillfulinfringementfindingsin' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>willful infringement findings in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>willful infringement</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Disney countersued—for $100 million in damages. Those damages
were predicated upon a claim that Video Pipeline had <quote>willfully
not allowed to show clips of the films as a way of selling them without
Disney's permission.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxadvertising2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>first-sale doctrine</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Now, you might think this is a close case, and I think the courts
would consider it a close case. My point here is to map the change
control. The technology expands the scope of effective control,
because the technology builds a copy into every transaction.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxvideopipeline' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxdisneyinc2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawcopiesascoreissueof3' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxfairuselegalintimidationtacticsagainst2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightusagerestrictionsattachedto2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitswillfulinfringementfindingsin' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Barnes & Noble</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>browsing</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>market competition</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 158 -->
No doubt, a potential is not yet an abuse, and so the potential for
significance. This second change does not affect the reach of copyright
regulation; it affects how such regulation is enforced.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>technology as automatic enforcer of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>technology</primary><secondary>copyright enforcement controlled by</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
In the world before digital technology, it was generally the law that
controlled whether and how someone was regulated by copyright law.
your freedom.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Casablanca</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxmarxbrothers" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Marx Brothers</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxwarnerbrothers" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Warner Brothers</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmarxbrothers' class='startofrange'><primary>Marx Brothers</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxwarnerbrothers' class='startofrange'><primary>Warner Brothers</primary></indexterm>
<para>
There's a famous story about a battle between the Marx Brothers
and Warner Brothers. The Marxes intended to make a parody of
Warner Brothers that the Marx Brothers <quote>were brothers long before
you were.</quote><footnote><para>
<!-- f20 -->
+<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
Ibid. See also Vaidhyanathan, <citetitle>Copyrights and
Copywrongs</citetitle>, 1–3.
-<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
The Marx Brothers therefore owned the word
<citetitle>brothers</citetitle>, and if Warner Brothers insisted on
silly claim. This extremism was irrelevant to the real freedoms anyone
(including Warner Brothers) enjoyed.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxbooksoninternet' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>on Internet</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxbooksoninternet2' class='startofrange'><primary>books</primary><secondary>on Internet</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
On the Internet, however, there is no check on silly rules, because on
the Internet, increasingly, rules are enforced not by a human but by a
shame. Code would not get the humor of the Marx Brothers. The
consequence of that is not at all funny.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxwarnerbrothers" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref="idxmarxbrothers" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxwarnerbrothers' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmarxbrothers' class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm id="idxadobeebookreader" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Adobe eBook Reader</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxadobeebookreader' class='startofrange'><primary>Adobe eBook Reader</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Consider the life of my Adobe eBook Reader.
</para>
</para>
<figure id="fig-1611">
<title>Picture of an old version of Adobe eBook Reader</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1611.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1611.png" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
If you click on the Permissions button, you'll see a list of the
</para>
<figure id="fig-1612">
<title>List of the permissions that the publisher purports to grant.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1612.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1612.png" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 161 -->
permission to use the Read Aloud button to hear <citetitle>Middlemarch</citetitle>
read aloud through the computer.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Aristotle</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary><citetitle>Politics</citetitle>, (Aristotle)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Here's the e-book for another work in the public domain (including the
translation): Aristotle's <citetitle>Politics</citetitle>.
-<indexterm><primary>Aristotle</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary><citetitle>Politics</citetitle>, (Aristotle)</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<figure id="fig-1621">
<title>E-book of Aristotle;s <quote>Politics</quote></title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1621.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1621.png" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
According to its permissions, no printing or copying is permitted
</para>
<figure id="fig-1622">
<title>List of the permissions for Aristotle;s <quote>Politics</quote>.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1622.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1622.png" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
+<indexterm><primary>Future of Ideas, The (Lessig)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Lessig, Lawrence</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Finally (and most embarrassingly), here are the permissions for the
original e-book version of my last book, <citetitle>The Future of
<!-- PAGE BREAK 162 -->
<figure id="fig-1631">
<title>List of the permissions for <quote>The Future of Ideas</quote>.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1631.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1631.png" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
No copying, no printing, and don't you dare try to listen to this book!
if you push the Read Aloud button with my book, the machine simply
won't read aloud.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Marx Brothers</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Warner Brothers</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 163 -->
These are <emphasis>controls</emphasis>, not permissions. Imagine a
world where the Marx Brothers sold word processing software that, when
you tried to type <quote>Warner Brothers,</quote> erased <quote>Brothers</quote> from the
sentence.
-<indexterm><primary>Marx Brothers</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
This is the future of copyright law: not so much copyright
We've only scratched the surface of this story. Return to the Adobe
eBook Reader.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxalicesadventuresinwonderlandcarroll' class='startofrange'><primary>Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (Carroll)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpublicdomainebookrestrictionson2' class='startofrange'><primary>public domain</primary><secondary>e-book restrictions on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Early in the life of the Adobe eBook Reader, Adobe suffered a public
relations nightmare. Among the books that you could download for free
Wonderland</citetitle>. This wonderful book is in the public
domain. Yet when you clicked on Permissions for that book, you got the
following report:
-<indexterm><primary>Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (Carroll)</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<figure id="fig-1641">
<title>List of the permissions for <quote>Alice's Adventures in
Wonderland</quote>.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1641.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1641.png" align="center" width="50%"></graphic>
</figure>
-<beginpage pagenum="164"/>
+<!-- PAGE BREAK 164-->
<para>
Here was a public domain children's book that you were not allowed to
copy, not allowed to lend, not allowed to give, and, as the
such a use of an eBook Reader was fair? Adobe didn't answer because
the answer, however absurd it might seem, is no.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxalicesadventuresinwonderlandcarroll' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpublicdomainebookrestrictionson2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The point is not to blame Adobe. Indeed, Adobe is among the most
innovative companies developing strategies to balance open access to
control. That incentive is understandable, yet what it creates is
often crazy.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxadobeebookreader" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref='idxbooksoninternet' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxadobeebookreader' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxbooksoninternet2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
To see the point in a particularly absurd context, consider a favorite
story of mine that makes the same point.
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxaibo1" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Aibo robotic dog</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxroboticdog1" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>robotic dog</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxsonyaibo1" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Sony</primary>
- <secondary>Aibo robotic dog produced by</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxaibo1' class='startofrange'><primary>Aibo robotic dog</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxroboticdog1' class='startofrange'><primary>robotic dog</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxsonyaibo1' class='startofrange'><primary>Sony</primary><secondary>Aibo robotic dog produced by</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Consider the robotic dog made by Sony named <quote>Aibo.</quote> The Aibo
learns tricks, cuddles, and follows you around. It eats only electricity
The Aibo is expensive and popular. Fans from around the world
have set up clubs to trade stories. One fan in particular set up a Web
site to enable information about the Aibo dog to be shared. This fan set
-<beginpage pagenum="165"/>
+<!-- PAGE BREAK 165-->
up aibopet.com (and aibohack.com, but that resolves to the same site),
and on that site he provided information about how to teach an Aibo
to do tricks in addition to the ones Sony had taught it.
bit of tinkering that turned the dog into a more talented creature
than Sony had built.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxsonyaibo1" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref="idxroboticdog1" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref="idxaibo1" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxsonyaibo1' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxroboticdog1' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxaibo1' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
I've told this story in many contexts, both inside and outside the
United States. Once I was asked by a puzzled member of the audience,
thought, <emphasis>What possible problem could there be with teaching
a robot dog to dance?</emphasis>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Microsoft</primary><secondary>government case against</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Let's put the dog to sleep for a minute, and turn to a pony show—
not literally a pony show, but rather a paper that a Princeton academic
weakness in the SDMI system, and why SDMI would not, as presently
constituted, succeed.
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxaibo2" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Aibo robotic dog</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxroboticdog2" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>robotic dog</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxsonyaibo2" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Sony</primary>
- <secondary>Aibo robotic dog produced by</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxaibo2' class='startofrange'><primary>Aibo robotic dog</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxroboticdog2' class='startofrange'><primary>robotic dog</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxsonyaibo2' class='startofrange'><primary>Sony</primary><secondary>Aibo robotic dog produced by</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
What links these two, aibopet.com and Felten, is the letters they
then received. Aibopet.com received a letter from Sony about the
anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
</para>
</blockquote>
-<indexterm startref="idxsonyaibo2" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref="idxroboticdog2" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref="idxaibo2" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxsonyaibo2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxroboticdog2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxaibo2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
And though an academic paper describing the weakness in a system
of encryption should also be perfectly legal, Felten received a letter
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Aibo robotic dog</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>robotic dog</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>Sony</primary>
- <secondary>Aibo robotic dog produced by</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Sony</primary><secondary>Aibo robotic dog produced by</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Aibopet.com and Felten make the point. The Aibo hack circumvented a
copyright protection system for the purpose of enabling the dog to
his academic paper was enabling others to infringe others' copyright.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Rogers, Fred</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcassettevcrs2' class='startofrange'><primary>cassette recording</primary><secondary>VCRs</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The bizarreness of these arguments is captured in a cartoon drawn in
1981 by Paul Conrad. At that time, a court in California had held that
in the control of his or her life, in a healthy way, is
important.<footnote><para>
<!-- f23 -->
+<indexterm><primary>cassette recording</primary><secondary>VCRs</secondary></indexterm>
<citetitle>Sony Corporation of America</citetitle> v. <citetitle>Universal City Studios, Inc</citetitle>., 464 U.S. 417,
455 fn. 27 (1984). Rogers never changed his view about the VCR. See
James Lardner, <citetitle>Fast Forward: Hollywood, the Japanese, and the Onslaught of
to enable the use of particular copyrighted materials in ways that
would be considered fair use—a good end.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxhandguns' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>handguns</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxhandguns' class='startofrange'><primary>handguns</primary></indexterm>
<para>
A handgun can be used to shoot a police officer or a child. Most
<!-- PAGE BREAK 171 -->
such a use would be good. It, too, is a technology that has both good
and bad uses.
</para>
-<figure id="fig-1711">
+<figure id="fig-1711-vcr-handgun-cartoonfig">
<title>VCR/handgun cartoon.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1711.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1711.png" align="center" width="70%"></graphic>
</figure>
<indexterm><primary>Conrad, Paul</primary></indexterm>
<para>
good, but permits guns, despite the obvious and tragic harm they do.
</para>
<indexterm startref='idxhandguns' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcassettevcrs2' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Aibo robotic dog</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>robotic dog</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>Sony</primary>
- <secondary>Aibo robotic dog produced by</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Sony</primary><secondary>Aibo robotic dog produced by</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The Aibo and RIAA examples demonstrate how copyright owners are
changing the balance that copyright law grants. Using code, copyright
owned by separate media companies. Now, the media is increasingly
owned by only a few companies. Indeed, after the changes that the FCC
announced in June 2003, most expect that within a few years, we will
-live in a world where just three companies control more than percent
+live in a world where just three companies control more than 85 percent
of the media.
</para>
<para>
nature.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>cable television</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>BMG</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>EMI</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>McCain, John</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Universal Music Group</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Warner Music Group</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Changes in scope are the easier ones to describe. As Senator John
McCain summarized the data produced in the FCC's review of media
Molly Ivins, <quote>Media Consolidation Must Be Stopped,</quote> <citetitle>Charleston Gazette</citetitle>,
31 May 2003.
</para></footnote>
-<indexterm><primary>BMG</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>EMI</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>McCain, John</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Universal Music Group</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Warner Music Group</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
The story with radio is even more dramatic. Before deregulation,
framers sought to protect. Indeed, it is a market that is quite well
protected— by the market.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Fallows, James</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Concentration in size alone is one thing. The more invidious
change is in the nature of that concentration. As author James Fallows
put it in a recent article about Rupert Murdoch,
-<indexterm><primary>Fallows, James</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<blockquote>
<para>
owning as many outlets of media as possible. A picture describes this
pattern better than a thousand words could do:
</para>
-<figure id="fig-1761">
+<figure id="fig-1761-pattern-modern-media-ownership">
<title>Pattern of modern media ownership.</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/1761.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/1761.png" align="center" width="90%"></graphic>
</figure>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 175 -->
fired: The content of any show developed for a network is increasingly
owned by the network.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Diller, Barry</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Moyers, Bill</primary></indexterm>
<para>
While the number of channels has increased dramatically, the ownership
of those channels has narrowed to an ever smaller and smaller few. As
Barry Diller said to Bill Moyers,
-<indexterm><primary>Diller, Barry</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Moyers, Bill</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<blockquote>
<para>
depend fundamentally upon the press to help inform Americans about
these issues.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxadvertising3' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>advertising</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxadvertising3' class='startofrange'><primary>advertising</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcommercials' class='startofrange'><primary>commercials</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxtelevisionadvertisingon' class='startofrange'><primary>television</primary><secondary>advertising on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Nick and Norm anti-drug campaign</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Beginning in 1998, the Office of National Drug Control Policy launched
a media campaign as part of the <quote>war on drugs.</quote> The campaign produced
the world to help you get your message out. Can you be sure your
message will be heard then?
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>First Amendment to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>First Amendment</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Supreme Court, U.S.</primary><secondary>on television advertising bans</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>television</primary><secondary>controversy avoided by</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
No. You cannot. Television stations have a general policy of avoiding
<quote>controversial</quote> ads. Ads sponsored by the government are deemed
opportunity to present its case. And the courts will defend the
rights of the stations to be this biased.<footnote><para>
<!-- f34 -->
+<indexterm><primary>ABC</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Comcast</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Marijuana Policy Project</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>NBC</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>WJOA</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>WRC</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>advertising</primary></indexterm>
The Marijuana Policy Project, in February 2003, sought to place ads
that directly responded to the Nick and Norm series on stations within
the Washington, D.C., area. Comcast rejected the ads as <quote>against
agreed to run the ads and accepted payment to do so, but later decided
not to run the ads and returned the collected fees. Interview with
Neal Levine, 15 October 2003. These restrictions are, of course, not
-limited to drug policy. See, for example, Nat Ives, <quote>On the Issue of
-an Iraq War, Advocacy Ads Meet with Rejection from TV Networks,</quote> <citetitle>New
-York Times</citetitle>, 13 March 2003, C4. Outside of election-related air time
-there is very little that the FCC or the courts are willing to do to
-even the playing field. For a general overview, see Rhonda Brown, <quote>Ad
-Hoc Access: The Regulation of Editorial Advertising on Television and
-Radio,</quote> <citetitle>Yale Law and Policy Review</citetitle> 6 (1988): 449–79, and for a
-more recent summary of the stance of the FCC and the courts, see
-<citetitle>Radio-Television News Directors Association</citetitle> v. <citetitle>FCC</citetitle>, 184 F. 3d 872
+limited to drug policy. See, for example, Nat Ives, <quote>On the
+Issue of an Iraq War, Advocacy Ads Meet with Rejection from TV
+Networks,</quote> <citetitle>New York Times</citetitle>, 13 March
+2003, C4. Outside of election-related air time there is very little
+that the FCC or the courts are willing to do to even the playing
+field. For a general overview, see Rhonda Brown, <quote>Ad Hoc Access:
+The Regulation of Editorial Advertising on Television and
+Radio,</quote> <citetitle>Yale Law and Policy Review</citetitle> 6
+(1988): 449–79, and for a more recent summary of the stance of
+the FCC and the courts, see <citetitle>Radio-Television News Directors
+Association</citetitle> v. <citetitle>FCC</citetitle>, 184 F. 3d 872
(D.C. Cir. 1999). Municipal authorities exercise the same authority as
the networks. In a recent example from San Francisco, the San
Francisco transit authority rejected an ad that criticized its Muni
-diesel buses. Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross, <quote>Antidiesel Group Fuming
-After Muni Rejects Ad,</quote> SFGate.com, 16 June 2003, available at
-<ulink url="http://free-culture.cc/notes/">link #32</ulink>. The ground
-was that the criticism was <quote>too controversial.</quote>
-<indexterm><primary>ABC</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Comcast</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Marijuana Policy Project</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>NBC</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>WJOA</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>WRC</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>advertising</primary></indexterm>
+diesel buses. Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross, <quote>Antidiesel Group
+Fuming After Muni Rejects Ad,</quote> SFGate.com, 16 June 2003,
+available at <ulink url="http://free-culture.cc/notes/">link
+#32</ulink>. The ground was that the criticism was <quote>too
+controversial.</quote>
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcommercials' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxtelevisionadvertisingon' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
I'd be happy to defend the networks' rights, as well—if we lived
in a media market that was truly diverse. But concentration in the
significant regulation of culture that our free society has
known.<footnote><para>
<!-- f35 -->
+<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
Siva Vaidhyanathan captures a similar point in his <quote>four surrenders</quote> of
copyright law in the digital age. See Vaidhyanathan, 159–60.
-<indexterm><primary>Vaidhyanathan, Siva</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
</para>
<para>
notwithstanding, historically, this property right (as with all
property rights<footnote><para>
<!-- f36 -->
+<indexterm><primary>legal realist movement</primary></indexterm>
It was the single most important contribution of the legal realist
movement to demonstrate that all property rights are always crafted to
balance public and private interests. See Thomas C. Grey, <quote>The
Disintegration of Property,</quote> in <citetitle>Nomos XXII: Property</citetitle>, J. Roland
Pennock and John W. Chapman, eds. (New York: New York University
Press, 1980).
-<indexterm><primary>legal realist movement</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>)
has been crafted to balance the important need to give authors and
artists incentives with the equally important need to assure access to
limits on the scope of the interests protected by <quote>property.</quote> The very
birth of <quote>copyright</quote> as a statutory right recognized those limits, by
granting copyright owners protection for a limited time only (the
-story of chapter 6). The tradition of <quote>fair use</quote> is animated by a
-similar concern that is increasingly under strain as the costs of
-exercising any fair use right become unavoidably high (the story of
-chapter 7). Adding
+story of chapter <xref xrefstyle="select: labelnumber"
+linkend="founders"/>). The tradition of <quote>fair use</quote> is
+animated by a similar concern that is increasingly under strain as the
+costs of exercising any fair use right become unavoidably high (the
+story of chapter <xref xrefstyle="select: labelnumber"
+linkend="recorders"/>). Adding
<!-- PAGE BREAK 184 -->
statutory rights where markets might stifle innovation is another
-familiar limit on the property right that copyright is (chapter
-8). And granting archives and libraries a broad freedom to collect,
-claims of property notwithstanding, is a crucial part of guaranteeing
-the soul of a culture (chapter 9). Free cultures, like free markets,
-are built with property. But the nature of the property that builds a
-free culture is very different from the extremist vision that
-dominates the debate today.
+familiar limit on the property right that copyright is (chapter <xref
+xrefstyle="select: labelnumber" linkend="transformers"/>). And
+granting archives and libraries a broad freedom to collect, claims of
+property notwithstanding, is a crucial part of guaranteeing the soul
+of a culture (chapter <xref xrefstyle="select: labelnumber"
+linkend="collectors"/>). Free cultures, like free markets, are built
+with property. But the nature of the property that builds a free
+culture is very different from the extremist vision that dominates the
+debate today.
</para>
<para>
Free culture is increasingly the casualty in this war on piracy. In
<!-- PAGE BREAK 186 -->
<chapter label="11" id="chimera">
<title>CHAPTER ELEVEN: Chimera</title>
-<indexterm id="idxchimera" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>chimeras</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxwells" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Wells, H. G.</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxtcotb" class='startofrange'>
- <primary><quote>Country of the Blind, The</quote> (Wells)</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxchimera' class='startofrange'><primary>chimeras</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxwells' class='startofrange'><primary>Wells, H. G.</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxtcotb' class='startofrange'><primary><quote>Country of the Blind, The</quote> (Wells)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>In a well-known</emphasis> short story by
certainty that she was not the person whose blood was at the
scene. …</quote>
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxtcotb" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref="idxwells" class="endofrange"/>
+<indexterm startref='idxtcotb' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxwells' class="endofrange"/>
<para>
Before I had read about chimeras, I would have said they were
impossible. A single person can't have two sets of DNA. The very idea
</para></footnote>
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxchimera" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxchimera' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Alternatively, we could respond to file sharing the way many kids act
as though we've responded. We could totally legalize it. Let there be
work spread across the Internet. But as the law is currently crafted, this
work is presumptively illegal.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Worldcom</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>exaggerated claims of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>in recording industry</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>doctors malpractice claims against</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Jordan, Jesse</primary></indexterm>
<para>
That presumption will increasingly chill creativity, as the
examples of extreme penalties for vague infringements continue to
proliferate. It is impossible to get a clear sense of what's allowed
and what's not, and at the same time, the penalties for crossing the
line are astonishingly harsh. The four students who were threatened
-by the RIAA ( Jesse Jordan of chapter 3 was just one) were threatened
-with a $98 billion lawsuit for building search engines that permitted
-songs to be copied. Yet World-Com—which defrauded investors of
-$11 billion, resulting in a loss to investors in market capitalization
-of over $200 billion—received a fine of a mere $750
+by the RIAA (Jesse Jordan of chapter <xref xrefstyle="select:
+labelnumber" linkend="catalogs"/> was just one) were threatened with a
+$98 billion lawsuit for building search engines that permitted songs
+to be copied. Yet World-Com—which defrauded investors of $11
+billion, resulting in a loss to investors in market capitalization of
+over $200 billion—received a fine of a mere $750
million.<footnote><para>
<!-- f1. -->
See Lynne W. Jeter, <citetitle>Disconnected: Deceit and Betrayal at WorldCom</citetitle>
Can common sense recognize the absurdity in a world where
the maximum fine for downloading two songs off the Internet is more
than the fine for a doctor's negligently butchering a patient?
-<indexterm><primary>Worldcom</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<indexterm><primary>art, underground</primary></indexterm>
<para>
</section>
<section id="innovators">
<title>Constraining Innovators</title>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawinnovationhamperedby' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>innovation hampered by</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinnovationindustryestablishmentopposedto2' class='startofrange'><primary>innovation</primary><secondary>industry establishment opposed to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxregulationasestablishmentprotectionism2' class='startofrange'><primary>regulation</primary><secondary>as establishment protectionism</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The story of the last section was a crunchy-lefty
story—creativity quashed, artists who can't speak, yada yada
seems to be just about everything. And if you think that, you might
think there's little in this story to worry you.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxmarketconstraints2' class='startofrange'><primary>market constraints</primary></indexterm>
<para>
But there's an aspect of this story that is not lefty in any sense.
Indeed, it is an aspect that could be written by the most extreme
promarket ideologue. And if you're one of these sorts (and a special
-one at that, 188 pages into a book like this), then you can see this
-other aspect by substituting <quote>free market</quote> every place I've spoken of
-<quote>free culture.</quote> The point is the same, even if the interests
-affecting culture are more fundamental.
+one at that, <xref xrefstyle="select: pagenumber"
+linkend="innovators"/> pages into a book like this), then you
+can see this other aspect by substituting <quote>free market</quote>
+every place I've spoken of <quote>free culture.</quote> The point is
+the same, even if the interests affecting culture are more
+fundamental.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>market constraints</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The charge I've been making about the regulation of culture is the
same charge free marketers make about regulating markets. Everyone, of
simply enables the powerful industries of today to protect themselves
against the competitors of tomorrow.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxmarketconstraints2' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Barry, Hank</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>venture capitalists</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This is the single most dramatic effect of the shift in regulatory
<!-- PAGE BREAK 198 -->
lesson. That lesson—what former Napster CEO Hank Barry calls a
<quote>nuclear pall</quote> that has fallen over the Valley—has been learned.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Future of Ideas, The (Lessig)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Lessig, Lawrence</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Consider one example to make the point, a story whose beginning
I told in <citetitle>The Future of Ideas</citetitle> and which has progressed in a way that
even I (pessimist extraordinaire) would never have predicted.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxmpcom' class='startofrange'><primary>MP3.com</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmympcom' class='startofrange'><primary>my.mp3.com</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Roberts, Michael</primary></indexterm>
<para>
In 1997, Michael Roberts launched a company called MP3.com. MP3.com
MP3.com offered creators a venue to distribute their creativity,
without demanding an exclusive engagement from the creators.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Lovett, Lyle</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcdsprefdata' class='startofrange'><primary>CDs</primary><secondary>preference data on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
To make this system work, however, MP3.com needed a reliable way to
recommend music to its users. The idea behind this alternative was to
leverage the revealed preferences of music listeners to recommend new
artists. If you like Lyle Lovett, you're likely to enjoy Bonnie
Raitt. And so on.
-<indexterm><primary>Lovett, Lyle</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
This idea required a simple way to gather data about user preferences.
as a by-product, by seeing the content they already owned, to discover
the kind of content the users liked.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcdsprefdata' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
To make this system function, however, MP3.com needed to copy 50,000
CDs to a server. (In principle, it could have been the user who
copies, it was 50,000 copies directed at giving customers something
they had already bought.
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxvivendiuniversal" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Vivendi Universal</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxvivendiuniversal' class='startofrange'><primary>Vivendi Universal</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>distribution technology targeted in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>exaggerated claims of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitsinrecordingindustry3' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>in recording industry</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>copyright infringement lawsuits of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)</primary><secondary>copyright infringement lawsuits filed by</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>regulation</primary><secondary>outsize penalties of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Nine days after MP3.com launched its service, the five major labels,
headed by the RIAA, brought a lawsuit against MP3.com. MP3.com settled
dared to suggest that the law was less restrictive than the labels
demanded.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxvivendiuniversal' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The clear purpose of this lawsuit (which was settled for an
unspecified amount shortly after the story was no longer covered in
you who believe the law should be less restrictive should realize that
such a view of the law will cost you and your firm dearly.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxvivendiuniversal" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmpcom' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxmympcom' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinfringementlawsuitsinrecordingindustry3' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Barry, Hank</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright infringement lawsuits</primary><secondary>distribution technology targeted in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxbmw' class='startofrange'><primary>BMW</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcarsmpsoundsystemsin' class='startofrange'><primary>cars, MP3 sound systems in</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>EMI</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Hummer, John</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Barry, Hank</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Hummer Winblad</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>MP3 players</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Napster</primary><secondary>venture capital for</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxneedlemanrafe' class='startofrange'><primary>Needleman, Rafe</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Universal Music Group</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>venture capitalists</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This strategy is not just limited to the lawyers. In April 2003,
Universal and EMI brought a lawsuit against Hummer Winblad, the
venture capital firm (VC) that had funded Napster at a certain stage of
-its development, its cofounder ( John Hummer), and general partner
+its development, its cofounder (John Hummer), and general partner
(Hank Barry).<footnote><para>
<!-- f4. -->
See Joseph Menn, <quote>Universal, EMI Sue Napster Investor,</quote> <citetitle>Los Angeles
afraid of technologies that touch content. In an article in
<citetitle>Business 2.0</citetitle>, Rafe Needleman describes a
discussion with BMW:
-<indexterm><primary>EMI</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Universal Music Group</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<blockquote>
-<indexterm><primary>BMW</primary></indexterm>
<para>
I asked why, with all the storage capacity and computer power in
the car, there was no way to play MP3 files. I was told that BMW
</para></footnote>
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxbmw' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcarsmpsoundsystemsin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxneedlemanrafe' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This is the world of the mafia—filled with <quote>your money or your
life</quote> offers, governed in the end not by courts but by the threats
competition. Yet the effect of the law today is to stifle just this
kind of competition. The effect is to produce an overregulated
culture, just as the effect of too much control in the market is to
-produce an overregulatedregulated market.
+produce an overregulated-regulated market.
</para>
<para>
The building of a permission culture, rather than a free culture, is
the technology, but will likely be eclipsed by advances around exactly
those requirements.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Intel</primary></indexterm>
<para>
In March 2002, a broad coalition of technology companies, led by
Intel, tried to get Congress to see the harm that such legislation
Their argument was obviously not that copyright should not be
protected. Instead, they argued, any protection should not do more
harm than good.
-<indexterm><primary>Intel</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>There is one</emphasis> more obvious way in
When done right, it benefits creators and harms leeches. When done
wrong, it is regulation the powerful use to defeat competitors.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>cassette recording</primary><secondary>VCRs</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>VCRs</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>statutory licenses</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>statutory licenses in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
As I described in chapter <xref xrefstyle="select: labelnumber"
linkend="property-i"/>, despite this feature of copyright as
<!-- f9. -->
Jessica Litman, <citetitle>Digital Copyright</citetitle> (Amherst,
N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2001).
+<indexterm><primary>Digital Copyright (Litman)</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Litman, Jessica</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
-overall this history of copyright is not bad. As chapter 10 details,
+overall this history of copyright is not bad. As chapter
+<xref xrefstyle="select: labelnumber" linkend="property-i"/> details,
when new technologies have come along, Congress has struck a balance
to assure that the new is protected from the old. Compulsory, or
statutory, licenses have been one part of that strategy. Free use (as
creators, both the courts and Congress have imposed legal restrictions
that will have the effect of smothering the new to benefit the old.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetradioon' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>radio on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxradiooninternet' class='startofrange'><primary>radio</primary><secondary>on Internet</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The response by the courts has been fairly universal.<footnote><para>
<!-- f10. -->
here.<footnote><para>
<!-- f11. -->
<indexterm><primary>Tauzin, Billy</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Berman, Howard L.</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Hollings, Fritz</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>broadcast flag</primary></indexterm>
For example, in July 2002, Representative Howard Berman introduced the
Peer-to-Peer Piracy Prevention Act (H.R. 5211), which would immunize
copyright holders from liability for damage done to computers when the
Digital Media in a Post-Napster World,</quote> 27 June 2003, 33–34,
available at
<ulink url="http://free-culture.cc/notes/">link #44</ulink>.
-<indexterm><primary>Berman, Howard L.</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Hollings, Fritz</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>broadcast flag</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
But there is one example that captures the flavor of them all. This is
the story of the demise of Internet radio.
</para>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>artists</primary>
- <secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>artists</primary><secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Kennedy, John F.</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 204 -->
then whenever that recording was played on the radio, the current
copyright owners of <quote>Happy Birthday</quote> would get some money, whereas
Marilyn Monroe would not.
-<indexterm><primary>Kennedy, John F.</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
The reasoning behind this balance struck by Congress makes some
question we should ask is, what copyright rules would govern Internet
radio?
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxartistspayments2' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>artists</primary>
- <secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxartistsrecordingindustrypaymentsto3' class='startofrange'><primary>artists</primary><secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on copyright laws</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on radio</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on recording industry</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustryartistremunerationin3' class='startofrange'><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>artist remuneration in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustryradiobroadcastand2' class='startofrange'><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>radio broadcast and</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustryinternetradiohamperedby' class='startofrange'><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>Internet radio hampered by</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustryassociationofamericariaaoninternetradiofees' class='startofrange'><primary>Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)</primary><secondary>on Internet radio fees</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustryassociationofamericariaalobbyingpowerof' class='startofrange'><primary>Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)</primary><secondary>lobbying power of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
But here the power of the lobbyists is reversed. Internet radio is a
new industry. The recording artists, on the other hand, have a very
A regular radio station broadcasting the same content would pay no
equivalent fee.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxartistspayments2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxartistsrecordingindustrypaymentsto3' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustryartistremunerationin3' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustryradiobroadcastand2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustryassociationofamericariaaoninternetradiofees' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustryassociationofamericariaalobbyingpowerof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The burden is not financial only. Under the original rules that were
proposed, an Internet radio station (but not a terrestrial radio
the country in which the user received the transmissions.
</para></listitem>
</orderedlist>
-
+<indexterm><primary>Library of Congress</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The Librarian of Congress eventually suspended these reporting
requirements, pending further study. And he also changed the original
differences? Was the motive to protect artists against piracy?
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Real Networks</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxalbenalex2' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Alben, Alex</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxalbenalex2' class='startofrange'><primary>Alben, Alex</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustryassociationofamericariaaoninternetradiofees2' class='startofrange'><primary>Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)</primary><secondary>on Internet radio fees</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxartistsrecordingindustrypaymentsto4' class='startofrange'><primary>artists</primary><secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxrecordingindustryartistremunerationin4' class='startofrange'><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>artist remuneration in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
In a rare bit of candor, one RIAA expert admitted what seemed obvious
to everyone at the time. As Alex Alben, vice president for Public
high, you're going to drive the small webcasters out of
business. …</quote>
</para>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>artists</primary>
- <secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>artists</primary><secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
And the RIAA experts said, <quote>Well, we don't really model this as an
industry with thousands of webcasters, <emphasis>we think it should be
</para>
</blockquote>
<indexterm startref='idxalbenalex2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustryassociationofamericariaaoninternetradiofees2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxartistsrecordingindustrypaymentsto4' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustryartistremunerationin4' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Translation: The aim is to use the law to eliminate competition, so
that this platform of potentially immense competition, which would
practically no one, on either the right or the left, who is doing anything
effective to prevent it.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawinnovationhamperedby' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinnovationindustryestablishmentopposedto2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxregulationasestablishmentprotectionism2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetradioon' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxradiooninternet' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxrecordingindustryinternetradiohamperedby' class='endofrange'/>
</section>
<section id="corruptingcitizens">
<title>Corrupting Citizens</title>
as it is, is that those with the power can use the law to quash any rights
they oppose.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>alcohol prohibition</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Wars of prohibition are nothing new in America. This one is just
something more extreme than anything we've seen before. We
We pride ourselves on our <quote>free society,</quote> but an endless array of
ordinary behavior is regulated within our society. And as a result, a
huge proportion of Americans regularly violate at least some law.
-<indexterm><primary>alcohol prohibition</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>law schools</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This state of affairs is not without consequence. It is a particularly
salient issue for teachers like me, whose job it is to teach law
others, but still, everywhere in America today—can't live their
lives both normally and legally, since <quote>normally</quote> entails a certain
degree of illegality.
-<indexterm><primary>law schools</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
The response to this general illegality is either to enforce the law
right: In a series of commercials, Apple endorsed the <quote>Rip, Mix, Burn</quote>
capacities of digital technologies.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Adromeda</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Andromeda</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcdsmix' class='startofrange'><primary>CDs</primary><secondary>mix technology and</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
This <quote>use</quote> of my records is certainly valuable. I have begun a large
process at home of ripping all of my and my wife's CDs, and storing
plastic or were part of a massively complex <quote>digital rights
management</quote> system.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcdsmix' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
If the only way to assure that artists get paid were the elimination
of the ability to freely move content, then these technologies to
tradition as deep and important as our tradition of free culture.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Electronic Frontier Foundation</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxisps' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>ISPs (Internet service providers), user identities revealed by</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxisps' class='startofrange'><primary>ISPs (Internet service providers), user identities revealed by</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>There's one more</emphasis> aspect to this
corruption that is particularly important to civil liberties, and
a very large percentage of the population into criminals.</quote> This
is the collateral damage to civil liberties generally.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>von Lohmann, Fred</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<quote>If you can treat someone as a putative lawbreaker,</quote> von Lohmann
explains,
-<indexterm><primary>von Lohmann, Fred</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<blockquote>
<para>
network. She can, in some cases, be expelled.
</para>
<indexterm startref='idxisps' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>von Lohmann, Fred</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Now, of course, she'll have the right to defend herself. You can hire
a lawyer for her (at $300 per hour, if you're lucky), and she can
have already learned, our presumptions about innocence disappear in
the middle of wars of prohibition. This war is no different.
Says von Lohmann,
-<indexterm><primary>von Lohmann, Fred</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<blockquote>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 220 -->
<chapter label="13" id="eldred">
<title>CHAPTER THIRTEEN: Eldred</title>
-<indexterm id="idxhawthornenathaniel" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Hawthorne, Nathaniel</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxeldrederic' class='startofrange'><primary>Eldred, Eric</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxhawthornenathaniel' class='startofrange'><primary>Hawthorne, Nathaniel</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>In 1995</emphasis>, a father was frustrated
that his daughters didn't seem to like Hawthorne. No doubt there was
Eldred thought, with links to pictures and explanatory text, would
make this nineteenth-century author's work come alive.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxlibrariesofpublicdomainliterature' class='startofrange'><primary>libraries</primary><secondary>of public-domain literature</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpublicdomainlibraryofworksderivedfrom' class='startofrange'><primary>public domain</primary><secondary>library of works derived from</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
It didn't work—at least for his daughters. They didn't find
Hawthorne any more interesting than before. But Eldred's experiment
a library of public domain works by scanning these works and making
them available for free.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxdisneywalt5' class='startofrange'><primary>Disney, Walt</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Grimm fairy tales</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Eldred's library was not simply a copy of certain public domain
works, though even a copy would have been of great value to people
many others, into a form more accessible—technically
accessible—today.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Scarlet Letter, The (Hawthorne)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Eldred's freedom to do this with Hawthorne's work grew from the same
source as Disney's. Hawthorne's <citetitle>Scarlet Letter</citetitle> had passed into the
(<citetitle>The Hunchback of Notre Dame</citetitle>, <citetitle>Treasure Planet</citetitle>). These are all
commercial publications of public domain works.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxhawthornenathaniel" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxhawthornenathaniel' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxdisneywalt5' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
The Internet created the possibility of noncommercial publications of
public domain works. Eldred's is just one example. There are literally
individuals and groups dedicated to spreading culture
generally.<footnote><para>
<!-- f1. -->
+<indexterm><primary>pornography</primary></indexterm>
There's a parallel here with pornography that is a bit hard to
describe, but it's a strong one. One phenomenon that the Internet
created was a world of noncommercial pornographers—people who
at least as important to protect the Eldreds of the world as to
protect noncommercial pornographers.</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressuscopyrighttermsextendedby2' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>copyright terms extended by</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightdurationof6' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>duration of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawtermextensionsin2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>term extensions in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Frost, Robert</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>New Hampshire (Frost)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>patents</primary><secondary>in public domain</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpatentsfuturepatentsvsfuturecopyrightsin' class='startofrange'><primary>patents</primary><secondary>future patents vs. future copyrights in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
As I said, Eldred lives in New Hampshire. In 1998, Robert Frost's
collection of poems <citetitle>New Hampshire</citetitle> was slated to
if Congress extends the term again). By contrast, in the same period,
more than 1 million patents will pass into the public domain.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxlibrariesofpublicdomainliterature' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpublicdomainlibraryofworksderivedfrom' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Bono, Mary</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Bono, Sonny</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightinperpetuity4' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright</primary><secondary>in perpetuity</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxsonnybonocopyrighttermextensionactctea2' class='startofrange'><primary>Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) (1998)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 222 -->
forever less one day. Perhaps the Committee may look at that next
Congress,</quote> 144 Cong. Rec. H9946, 9951-2 (October 7, 1998).
</para></footnote>
-
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxpatentsfuturepatentsvsfuturecopyrightsin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>felony punishment for infringement of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>NET (No Electronic Theft) Act (1998)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>No Electronic Theft (NET) Act (1998)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>peer-to-peer (p2p) file sharing</primary><secondary>felony punishments for</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Eldred decided to fight this law. He first resolved to fight it through
civil disobedience. In a series of interviews, Eldred announced that he
complained. This was a dangerous strategy for a disabled programmer
to undertake.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxsonnybonocopyrighttermextensionactctea2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusconstitutionalpowersof' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>constitutional powers of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxconstitutionusprogressclauseof2' class='startofrange'><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>Progress Clause of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxprogressclause2' class='startofrange'><primary>Progress Clause</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxlessiglawrenceeldredcaseinvolvementof' class='startofrange'><primary>Lessig, Lawrence</primary><secondary>Eldred case involvement of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
It was here that I became involved in Eldred's battle. I was a
constitutional
their … Writings. …
</para>
</blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxeldrederic' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
As I've described, this clause is unique within the power-granting
clause of Article I, section 8 of our Constitution. Every other clause
are also specific— by <quote>securing</quote> <quote>exclusive Rights</quote> (i.e.,
copyrights) <quote>for limited Times.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxconstitutionusprogressclauseof2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxprogressclause2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxlessiglawrenceeldredcaseinvolvementof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Jaszi, Peter</primary></indexterm>
<para>
In the past forty years, Congress has gotten into the practice of
extending existing terms of copyright protection. What puzzled me
Congress has the power to extend its term, then Congress can achieve
what the Constitution plainly forbids—perpetual terms <quote>on the
installment plan,</quote> as Professor Peter Jaszi so nicely put it.
-<indexterm><primary>Jaszi, Peter</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightinperpetuity4' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusconstitutionalpowersof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Lessig, Lawrence</primary><secondary>Eldred case involvement of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
As an academic, my first response was to hit the books. I remember
sitting late at the office, scouring on-line databases for any serious
they could extend it once, they would extend it again and again and
again.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressuscopyrighttermsextendedby2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightdurationof6' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawtermextensionsin2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
It was also my judgment that <emphasis>this</emphasis> Supreme Court
would not allow Congress to extend existing terms. As anyone close to
devote my life to teaching constitutional law if these nine Justices
were going to be petty politicians.
</para>
+<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>
+<indexterm><primary>Disney, Walt</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>Now let's pause</emphasis> for a moment to
make sure we understand what the argument in
would be taken from the public domain. Eric Eldred was fighting a
piracy that affects us all.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Nashville Songwriters Association</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Some people view the public domain with contempt. In their brief
system, our law requires it. Some may not like the Constitution's
requirements, but that doesn't make the Constitution a pirate's
charter.
-<indexterm><primary>Nashville Songwriters Association</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
As we've seen, our constitutional system requires limits on
consequence
for other creative works is much more dire.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxageemichael' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Agee, Michael</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxageemichael' class='startofrange'><primary>Agee, Michael</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Hal Roach Studios</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Laurel and Hardy Films</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Lucky Dog, The</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Consider the story of Michael Agee, chairman of Hal Roach Studios,
which owns the copyrights for the Laurel and Hardy films. Agee is a
Songs, Books at Stake; Supreme Court Hears Arguments Today on Striking
Down Copyright Extension,</quote> <citetitle>Orlando Sentinel Tribune</citetitle>, 9 October 2002.
</para></footnote>
-
-<indexterm><primary>Lucky Dog, The</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
Yet Agee opposed the CTEA. His reasons demonstrate a rare virtue in
high; digital technology has lowered these costs substantially. While
it cost more than $10,000 to restore a ninety-minute black-and-white
film in 1993, it can now cost as little as $100 to digitize one hour of
-mm film.<footnote><para>
+
8 mm film.<footnote><para>
<!-- f12. -->
Brief of Hal Roach Studios and Michael Agee as Amicus Curiae
Supporting the Petitoners, <citetitle>Eldred</citetitle> v. <citetitle>Ashcroft</citetitle>, 537
<para>
But this situation has now changed.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxarchivesdigital2' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>archives, digital</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxarchivesdigital2' class='startofrange'><primary>archives, digital</primary></indexterm>
<para>
One crucially important consequence of the emergence of digital
technologies is to enable the archive that Brewster Kahle dreams of.
<!-- PAGE BREAK 235 -->
freedom to fill the gaps. As one researcher calculated for American
culture, 94 percent of the films, books, and music produced between
-and 1946 is not commercially available. However much you love the
+1923 and 1946 is not commercially available. However much you love the
commercial market, if access is a value, then 6 percent is a failure
to provide that value.<footnote><para>
<!-- f13. -->
were rich and famous, but because they, in the aggregate, demonstrated
that this law was unconstitutional regardless of one's politics.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Eagle Forum</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Schlafly, Phyllis</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The first step happened all by itself. Phyllis Schlafly's
organization, Eagle Forum, had been an opponent of the CTEA from the
power of money. Schlafly enumerated Disney's contributions to the key
players on the committees. It was money, not justice, that gave Mickey
Mouse twenty more years in Disney's control, Schlafly argued.
-<indexterm><primary>Eagle Forum</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Schlafly, Phyllis</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
In the Court of Appeals, Eagle Forum was eager to file a brief
terms. That strong conservative argument persuaded a strong
conservative judge, Judge Sentelle.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>GNU/Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Intel</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Eagle Forum</primary></indexterm>
<para>
In the Supreme Court, the briefs on our side were about as diverse as
it gets. They included an extraordinary historical brief by the Free
<!-- PAGE BREAK 239 -->
-Software Foundation (home of the GNU project that made GNU/ Linux
+Software Foundation (home of the GNU project that made GNU/Linux
possible). They included a powerful brief about the costs of
uncertainty by Intel. There were two law professors' briefs, one by
copyright scholars and one by First Amendment scholars. There was an
exhaustive and uncontroverted brief by the world's experts in the
history of the Progress Clause. And of course, there was a new brief
by Eagle Forum, repeating and strengthening its arguments.
-<indexterm><primary>GNU/Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Intel</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Eagle Forum</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>American Association of Law Libraries</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>National Writers Union</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Those briefs framed a legal argument. Then to support the legal
argument, there were a number of powerful briefs by libraries and
archives, including the Internet Archive, the American Association of
Law Libraries, and the National Writers Union.
-<indexterm><primary>American Association of Law Libraries</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>National Writers Union</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Hal Roach Studios</primary></indexterm>
<para>
nothing more than <quote>rent-seeking</quote>—the fancy term economists use
to describe special-interest legislation gone wild.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Fried, Charles</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Morrison, Alan</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Public Citizen</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Reagan, Ronald</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The same effort at balance was reflected in the legal team we gathered
to write our briefs in the case. The Jones Day lawyers had been with
<!-- PAGE BREAK 240 -->
who had advised us early on about a First Amendment strategy; and
finally, former solicitor general Charles Fried.
-<indexterm><primary>Fried, Charles</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Morrison, Alan</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Public Citizen</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Reagan, Ronald</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Fried, Charles</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>constitutional powers of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>Commerce Clause of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Fried was a special victory for our side. Every other former solicitor
general was hired by the other side to defend Congress's power to give
while he had argued many positions in the Supreme Court that I
personally disagreed with, his joining the cause was a vote of
confidence in our argument.
-<indexterm><primary>Fried, Charles</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
The government, in defending the statute, had its collection of
continue to have the right to control who did what with content they
wanted to control.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Gershwin, George</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Porgy and Bess</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>pornography</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Dr. Seuss's representatives, for example, argued that it was
better for the Dr. Seuss estate to control what happened to
<!-- PAGE BREAK 241 -->
their view of how this part of American culture should be controlled,
and they wanted this law to help them effect that control.
-<indexterm><primary>Gershwin, George</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
This argument made clear a theme that is rarely noticed in this
assure that Congress's powers had limits.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Breyer, Stephen</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxginsburg' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Ginsburg, Ruth Bader</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxginsburg' class='startofrange'><primary>Ginsburg, Ruth Bader</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The Rest were the four Justices who had strongly opposed limits on
Congress's power. These four—Justice Stevens, Justice Souter,
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Ayer, Don</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Reagan, Ronald</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Fried, Charles</primary></indexterm>
<para>
One moot was before the lawyers at Jones Day. Don Ayer was the
skeptic. He had served in the Reagan Justice Department with Solicitor
General Charles Fried. He had argued many cases before the Supreme
Court. And in his review of the moot, he let his concern speak:
-<indexterm><primary>Fried, Charles</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
<quote>I'm just afraid that unless they really see the harm, they won't be
should decide the issue.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Ayer, Don</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Fried, Charles</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Would it have been different if I had argued it differently? Would it
have been different if Don Ayer had argued it? Or Charles Fried? Or
Kathleen Sullivan?
-<indexterm><primary>Fried, Charles</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
My friends huddled around me to insist it would not. The Court
stepped down from this pretty picture of dispassionate justice, I could
have persuaded.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Jaszi, Peter</primary></indexterm>
<para>
And even if I couldn't, then that doesn't excuse what happened in
January. For at the start of this case, one of America's leading
intellectual property professors stated publicly that my bringing this
case was a mistake. <quote>The Court is not ready,</quote> Peter Jaszi said; this
issue should not be raised until it is.
-<indexterm><primary>Jaszi, Peter</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
After the argument and after the decision, Peter said to me, and
</para>
<figure id="fig-18">
<title>Tom the Dancing Bug cartoon</title>
-<graphic fileref="images/18.png"></graphic>
+<graphic fileref="images/18.png" align="center" width="95%"></graphic>
<indexterm><primary>Bolling, Ruben</primary></indexterm>
</figure>
<para>
Eldred Act. And I had a few who directly suggested that they might be
willing to take the first step.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Lofgren, Zoe</primary></indexterm>
<para>
One representative, Zoe Lofgren of California, went so far as to get
the bill drafted. The draft solved any problem with international
introduced. On May 16, I posted on the Eldred Act blog, <quote>we are
close.</quote> There was a general reaction in the blog community that
something good might happen here.
-<indexterm><primary>Lofgren, Zoe</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
But at this stage, the lobbyists began to intervene. Jack Valenti and
</part>
<chapter label="15" id="c-conclusion">
<title>CONCLUSION</title>
-<indexterm id="idxantiretroviraldrugs" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>antiretroviral drugs</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxhivaidstherapies" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>HIV/AIDS therapies</primary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm id="idxafricahivmed" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Africa, medications for HIV patients in</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxafricamedicationsforhivpatientsin' class='startofrange'><primary>Africa, medications for HIV patients in</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxaidsmedications' class='startofrange'><primary>AIDS medications</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxantiretroviraldrugs' class='startofrange'><primary>antiretroviral drugs</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxdevelopingcountriesforeignpatentcostsin2' class='startofrange'><primary>developing countries, foreign patent costs in</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxdrugspharmaceutical' class='startofrange'><primary>drugs</primary><secondary>pharmaceutical</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxhivaidstherapies' class='startofrange'><primary>HIV/AIDS therapies</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>There are more</emphasis> than 35 million
people with the AIDS virus worldwide. Twenty-five million of them live
the developing world receive them—and half of them are in Brazil.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxpatentsonpharmaceuticals' class='startofrange'><primary>patents</primary><secondary>on pharmaceuticals</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpharmaceuticalpatents' class='startofrange'><primary>pharmaceutical patents</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 265 -->
These prices are not high because the ingredients of the drugs are
bringing, they started looking for ways to import HIV treatments at
costs significantly below the market price.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxinternationallaw2' class='startofrange'><primary>international law</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxparallelimportation' class='startofrange'><primary>parallel importation</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxsouthafricarepublicofpharmaceuticalimportsby' class='startofrange'><primary>South Africa, Republic of, pharmaceutical imports by</primary></indexterm>
<para>
In 1997, South Africa tried one tack. It passed a law to allow the
importation of patented medicines that had been produced or sold in
<indexterm><primary>Drahos, Peter</primary></indexterm>
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>United States Trade Representative (USTR)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
However, the United States government opposed the bill. Indeed, more
than opposed. As the International Intellectual Property Association
Africa, a Report Prepared for the World Intellectual Property
Organization</citetitle> (Washington, D.C., 2000), 15. </para></footnote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxparallelimportation' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
We should place the intervention by the United States in context. No
doubt patents are not the most important reason that Africans don't
importance of <quote>intellectual property</quote> that led these government actors
to intervene against the South African response to AIDS.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxsouthafricarepublicofpharmaceuticalimportsby' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
Now just step back for a moment. There will be a time thirty years
from now when our children look back at us and ask, how could we have
that results in so many deaths? What exactly is the insanity that
would allow so many to die for such an abstraction?
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxcorporationsinpharmaceuticalindustry' class='startofrange'><primary>corporations</primary><secondary>in pharmaceutical industry</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Some blame the drug companies. I don't. They are corporations.
Their managers are ordered by law to make money for the corporation.
drugs didn't get back into the United States, but those are mere
problems of technology. They could be overcome.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxintellectualpropertyrightsofdrugpatents' class='startofrange'><primary>intellectual property rights</primary><secondary>of drug patents</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
A different problem, however, could not be overcome. This is the
fear of the grandstanding politician who would call the presidents of
strategy thus becomes framed in terms of this ideal—the sanctity of an
idea called <quote>intellectual property.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxafricamedicationsforhivpatientsin' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxaidsmedications' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxantiretroviraldrugs' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxdevelopingcountriesforeignpatentcostsin2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxdrugspharmaceutical' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxhivaidstherapies' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcorporationsinpharmaceuticalindustry' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
So when the common sense of your child confronts you, what will
you say? When the common sense of a generation finally revolts
policy. For most of our history, both copyright and patent policies
were balanced in just this sense.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxpatentsonpharmaceuticals' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpharmaceuticalpatents' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternationallaw2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
But we as a culture have lost this sense of balance. We have lost the
critical eye that helps us see the difference between truth and
consequences more grave to the spread of ideas and culture than almost
any other single policy decision that we as a democracy will make.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxafricahivmed" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref="idxhivaidstherapies" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm startref="idxantiretroviraldrugs" class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxintellectualpropertyrightsofdrugpatents' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>A simple idea</emphasis> blinds us, and under
the cover of darkness, much happens that most of us would reject if
noticed. Powerful lobbies, complex issues, and MTV attention spans
produce the <quote>perfect storm</quote> for free culture.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Reagan, Ronald</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxbiomedicalresearch' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>biomedical research</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>academic journals</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>biomedical research</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxintellectualpropertyrightsinternationalorganizationonissuesof' class='startofrange'><primary>intellectual property rights</primary><secondary>international organization on issues of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>development of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>IBM</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>PLoS (Public Library of Science)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>public domain</primary><secondary>public projects in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>single nucleotied polymorphisms (SNPs)</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Wellcome Trust</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxworldintellectualpropertyorganizationwipo' class='startofrange'><primary>World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>World Wide Web</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Global Positioning System</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Reagan, Ronald</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxbiomedicalresearch' class='startofrange'><primary>biomedical research</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>In August 2003</emphasis>, a fight broke out
in the United States about a decision by the World Intellectual
Wide Web, both of which were developed on the basis of protocols in
the public domain. It included an emerging trend to support open
academic journals, including the Public Library of Science project
-that I describe in the Afterword. It included a project to develop
-single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which are thought to have
-great significance in biomedical research. (That nonprofit project
-comprised a consortium of the Wellcome Trust and pharmaceutical and
-technological companies, including Amersham Biosciences, AstraZeneca,
+that I describe in chapter
+<xref xrefstyle="select: labelnumber" linkend="c-afterword"/>. It
+included a project to develop single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs),
+which are thought to have great significance in biomedical
+research. (That nonprofit project comprised a consortium of the
+Wellcome Trust and pharmaceutical and technological companies,
+including Amersham Biosciences, AstraZeneca,
<!-- PAGE BREAK 270 -->
Aventis, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Hoffmann-La Roche,
Glaxo-SmithKline, IBM, Motorola, Novartis, Pfizer, and Searle.) It
included the Global Positioning System, which Ronald Reagan set free
in the early 1980s. And it included <quote>open source and free software.</quote>
-<indexterm><primary>academic journals</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>IBM</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>PLoS (Public Library of Science)</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<indexterm startref='idxbiomedicalresearch' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
property was balanced by agreements to keep access open or to impose
limitations on the way in which proprietary claims might be used.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxlessiglawrenceininternationaldebateonintellectualproperty' class='startofrange'><primary>Lessig, Lawrence</primary><secondary>in international debate on intellectual property</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
From the perspective of this book, then, the conference was ideal.<footnote><para>
<!-- f7. --> I should disclose that I was one of the people who asked WIPO for the
WIPO is the preeminent international body dealing with intellectual
property issues.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxworldsummitontheinformationsocietywsis' class='startofrange'><primary>World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Indeed, I was once publicly scolded for not recognizing this fact
about WIPO. In February 2003, I delivered a keynote address to a
thus the meeting about <quote>open and collaborative projects to create
public goods</quote> seemed perfectly appropriate within the WIPO agenda.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxintellectualpropertyrightsinternationalorganizationonissuesof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxworldintellectualpropertyorganizationwipo' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxworldsummitontheinformationsocietywsis' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxfreesoftwareopensourcesoftwarefsoss' class='startofrange'><primary>free software/open-source software (FS/OSS)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Apple Corporation</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxmicrosoftonfreesoftware' class='startofrange'><primary>Microsoft</primary><secondary>on free software</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
But there is one project within that list that is highly
controversial, at least among lobbyists. That project is <quote>open source
to explore requirements that they use open source or free software,
rather than <quote>proprietary software,</quote> for their own internal uses.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary><quote>copyleft</quote> licenses</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>GNU/Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>IBM</primary></indexterm>
<para>
I don't mean to enter that debate here. It is important only to
make clear that the distinction is not between commercial and
May 2001), available at
<ulink url="http://free-culture.cc/notes/">link #63</ulink>.
</para></footnote>
-<indexterm><primary>IBM</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary><quote>copyleft</quote> licenses</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>GNU/Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Linux operating system</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxlessiglawrenceininternationaldebateonintellectualproperty' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>General Public License (GPL)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>GPL (General Public License)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
More important for our purposes, to support <quote>open source and free
software</quote> is not to oppose copyright. <quote>Open source and free software</quote>
could not impose the same kind of requirements on its adopters. It
thus depends upon copyright law just as Microsoft does.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxintellectualpropertyrightsinternationalorganizationonissuesof2' class='startofrange'><primary>intellectual property rights</primary><secondary>international organization on issues of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxworldintellectualpropertyorganizationwipo2' class='startofrange'><primary>World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxkrimjonathan' class='startofrange'><primary>Krim, Jonathan</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Microsoft</primary><secondary>WIPO meeting opposed by</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
It is therefore understandable that as a proprietary software
developer, Microsoft would oppose this WIPO meeting, and
url="http://free-culture.cc/notes/">link #64</ulink>.
</para></footnote>
And without U.S. backing, the meeting was canceled.
-<indexterm><primary>Krim, Jonathan</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<para>
I don't blame Microsoft for doing what it can to advance its own
powerful software producer in the United States having succeeded in
its lobbying efforts.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxmicrosoftonfreesoftware' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Boland, Lois</primary></indexterm>
<para>
What was surprising was the United States government's reason for
to disclaim or waive such rights seems to us to be contrary to the
goals of WIPO.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxkrimjonathan' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
These statements are astonishing on a number of levels.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxfreesoftwareopensourcesoftwarefsoss' class='endofrange'/>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 273 -->
<para>
First, they are just flat wrong. As I described, most open source and
first-year law student, but an embarrassment from a high government
official dealing with intellectual property issues.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>drugs</primary><secondary>pharmaceutical</secondary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>generic drugs</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>patents</primary><secondary>on pharmaceuticals</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Second, who ever said that WIPO's exclusive aim was to <quote>promote</quote>
intellectual property maximally? As I had been scolded at the
is supposed to be about: giving individuals the right to decide what
to do with <emphasis>their</emphasis> property.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxboland' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Boland, Lois</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxboland' class='startofrange'><primary>Boland, Lois</primary></indexterm>
<para>
When Ms. Boland says that there is something wrong with a meeting
<quote>which has as its purpose to disclaim or waive such rights,</quote> she's
that they also should be exercised in the most extreme and restrictive
way possible.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxfeudalsystem' class='startofrange'><primary>feudal system</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpropertyrightsfeudalsystemof' class='startofrange'><primary>property rights</primary><secondary>feudal system of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
There is a history of just such a property system that is well known
in the Anglo-American tradition. It is called <quote>feudalism.</quote> Under
<emphasis>free</emphasis> or <emphasis>feudal</emphasis>. The trend is
toward the feudal.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxfeudalsystem' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpropertyrightsfeudalsystemof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
When this battle broke, I blogged it. A spirited debate within the
comment section ensued. Ms. Boland had a number of supporters who
that was particularly depressing for me. An anonymous poster wrote,
</para>
<blockquote>
+<indexterm startref='idxintellectualpropertyrightsinternationalorganizationonissuesof2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxworldintellectualpropertyorganizationwipo2' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
George, you misunderstand Lessig: He's only talking about the world as
it should be (<quote>the goal of WIPO, and the goal of any government,
It might be crazy to argue that we should preserve a tradition that has
been part of our tradition for most of our history—free culture.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>CodePink Women in Peace</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Safire, William</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Turner, Ted</primary></indexterm>
<para>
If this is crazy, then let there be more crazies. Soon.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>CodePink Women in Peace</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Safire, William</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Turner, Ted</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>There are moments</emphasis> of hope in this
struggle. And moments that surprise. When the FCC was considering
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Causby, Thomas Lee</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Causby, Tinie</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Creative Commons</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Gil, Gilberto</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>BBC</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Brazil, free culture in</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Creative Commons</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Gil, Gilberto</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>United Kingdom</primary><secondary>public creative archive in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Yet on the other side of the Atlantic, the BBC has just announced
that it will build a <quote>Creative Archive,</quote> from which British citizens can
Rights Reserved</quote> sorts believe you should be able to do with content
as you wish, regardless of whether you have permission or not.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetdevelopmentof2' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>development of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetinitialfreecharacterof' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>initial free character of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
When the Internet was first born, its initial architecture effectively
tilted in the <quote>no rights reserved</quote> direction. Content could be copied
the Internet today will become a <quote>get permission to cut and paste</quote>
world that is a creator's nightmare.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetdevelopmentof2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetinitialfreecharacterof' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
What's needed is a way to say something in the middle—neither
<quote>all rights reserved</quote> nor <quote>no rights reserved</quote> but <quote>some rights
way to restore a set of freedoms that we could just take for granted
before.
</para>
-
<section id="examples">
<title>Rebuilding Freedoms Previously Presumed: Examples</title>
-<indexterm id='browsing' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>browsing</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfreeculturerestorationeffortsonpreviousaspectsof' class='startofrange'><primary>free culture</primary><secondary>restoration efforts on previous aspects of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxbrowsing' class='startofrange'><primary>browsing</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxprivacyrights2' class='startofrange'><primary>privacy rights</primary></indexterm>
<para>
If you step back from the battle I've been describing here, you will
recognize this problem from other contexts. Think about
places, not by norms (snooping and gossip are just fun), but instead,
by the costs that friction imposes on anyone who would want to spy.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Amazon</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxamazon' class='startofrange'><primary>Amazon</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>cookies, Internet</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxinternetprivacyprotectionon' class='startofrange'><primary>Internet</primary><secondary>privacy protection on</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Enter the Internet, where the cost of tracking browsing in particular
has become quite tiny. If you're a customer at Amazon, then as you
and the function of cookies on the Net, it is easier to collect the
data than not. The friction has disappeared, and hence any <quote>privacy</quote>
protected by the friction disappears, too.
-<indexterm><primary>cookies, Internet</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>libraries</primary><secondary>privacy rights in use of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Amazon, of course, is not the problem. But we might begin to worry
about libraries. If you're one of those crazy lefties who thinks that
electronic spaces, then the friction-induced privacy of yesterday
disappears.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='browsing' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxbrowsing' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxamazon' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
It is this reality that explains the push of many to define <quote>privacy</quote>
on the Internet. It is the recognition that technology can remove what
technology now forces those who believe in privacy to affirmatively
act where, before, privacy was given by default.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxprivacyrights2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxinternetprivacyprotectionon' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>Data General</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>IBM</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxfreesoftwareopensourcesoftwarefsoss2' class='startofrange'><primary>free software/open-source software (FS/OSS)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
A similar story could be told about the birth of the free software
movement. When computers with software were first made available
binaries— was free. You couldn't run a program written for a
Data General machine on an IBM machine, so Data General and IBM didn't
care much about controlling their software.
-<indexterm><primary>IBM</primary></indexterm>
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Stallman, Richard</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm
id='idxstallmanrichard' class='startofrange'><primary>Stallman, Richard</primary></indexterm>
<para>
That was the world Richard Stallman was born into, and while he was a
researcher at MIT, he grew to love the community that developed when
too, was knowledge. Why shouldn't it be open for criticism like
anything else?
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxproprietarycode' class='startofrange'><primary>proprietary code</primary></indexterm>
<para>
No one answered that question. Instead, the architecture of revenue
for computing changed. As it became possible to import programs from
it, then the freedom to change and share software would be
fundamentally weakened.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxproprietarycode' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Torvalds, Linus</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Therefore, in 1984, Stallman began a project to build a free operating
space where free software would survive. He was actively protecting
what before had been passively guaranteed.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxfreesoftwareopensourcesoftwarefsoss2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxstallmanrichard' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm id='idxacademicjournals' class='startofrange'><primary>academic journals</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxscientificjournals' class='startofrange'><primary>scientific journals</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Finally, consider a very recent example that more directly resonates
with the story of this book. This is the shift in the way academic and
scientific journals are produced.
</para>
-<indexterm id="idxacademocjournals" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>academic journals</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxlexisandwestlaw' class='startofrange'><primary>Lexis and Westlaw</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxlawdatabasesofcasereportsin' class='startofrange'><primary>law</primary><secondary>databases of case reports in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>libraries</primary><secondary>journals in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Supreme Court, U.S.</primary><secondary>access to opinions of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
As digital technologies develop, it is becoming obvious to many that
printing thousands of copies of journals every month and sending them
to charge users for the privilege of gaining access to that Supreme
Court opinion through their respective services.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>public domain</primary><secondary>access fees for material in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpublicdomainlicensesystemforrebuildingof' class='startofrange'><primary>public domain</primary><secondary>license system for rebuilding of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
There's nothing wrong in general with this, and indeed, the ability to
charge for access to even public domain materials is a good incentive
domain, then there could be nothing wrong, in principle, with selling
access to material that is not in the public domain.
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxlexisandwestlaw' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxlawdatabasesofcasereportsin' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
But what if the only way to get access to social and scientific data
was through proprietary services? What if no one had the ability to
browse this data except by paying for a subscription?
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxlibrariesjournalsin' class='startofrange'><primary>libraries</primary><secondary>journals in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
As many are beginning to notice, this is increasingly the reality with
scientific journals. When these journals were distributed in paper
software, a changing technology and market shrink a freedom taken for
granted before.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>PLoS (Public Library of Science)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This shrinking freedom has led many to take affirmative steps to
restore the freedom that has been lost. The Public Library of Science
available for free. PLoS also sells a print version of its work, but
the copyright for the print journal does not inhibit the right of
anyone to redistribute the work for free.
-<indexterm><primary>PLoS (Public Library of Science)</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm startref='idxlibrariesjournalsin' class='endofrange'/>
<para>
This is one of many such efforts to restore a freedom taken for
granted before, but now threatened by changing technology and markets.
presumptively a good—especially when it helps spread knowledge
and science.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxacademocjournals" class='endofrange'/>
-
+<indexterm startref='idxfreeculturerestorationeffortsonpreviousaspectsof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxacademicjournals' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxscientificjournals' class='endofrange'/>
</section>
<section id="oneidea">
<title>Rebuilding Free Culture: One Idea</title>
-<indexterm id="idxcc" class='startofrange'>
- <primary>Creative Commons</primary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcreativecommons' class='startofrange'><primary>Creative Commons</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The same strategy could be applied to culture, as a response to the
increasing control effected through law and technology.
content available. And that content will in turn enable us to rebuild
a public domain.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Garlick, Mia</primary></indexterm>
<para>
This is just one project among many within the Creative Commons. And
of course, Creative Commons is not the only organization pursuing such
of content (<quote>content conducers,</quote> as attorney Mia Garlick calls them)
who help build the public domain and, by their work, demonstrate the
importance of the public domain to other creativity.
-<indexterm><primary>Garlick, Mia</primary></indexterm>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Jefferson, Thomas</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The aim is not to fight the <quote>All Rights Reserved</quote> sorts. The aim is to
complement them. The problems that the law creates for us as a culture
them—are needed. Creative Commons gives people a way effectively
to begin to build those rules.
</para>
-<indexterm id='idxbooksfreeonline2' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>free on-line releases of</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxbooksfreeonline2' class='startofrange'><primary>books</primary><secondary>free on-line releases of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Why would creators participate in giving up total control? Some
participate to better spread their content. Cory Doctorow, for
flexibly and cheaply. That difference, we believe, will enable
creativity to spread more easily.
</para>
-<indexterm startref="idxcc" class='endofrange'/>
-
+<indexterm startref='idxpublicdomainlicensesystemforrebuildingof' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcreativecommons' class='endofrange'/>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 292 -->
</section>
</section>
Copyright Office's role to that of approving standards for marking
content that have been crafted elsewhere.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>CDs</primary><secondary>copyright marking of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
For example, if a recording industry association devises a method for
marking CDs, it would propose that to the Copyright Office. The
<quote>idea/expression</quote> less necessary to navigate.
<!-- PAGE BREAK 298 -->
</para></listitem>
-<listitem><para>
+<listitem>
+<indexterm><primary>veterans' pensions</primary></indexterm>
+<para>
<!-- (3) -->
<emphasis>Keep it alive:</emphasis> Copyright should have to be
renewed. Especially if the maximum term is long, the copyright owner
If we make veterans suffer that burden, I don't see why we couldn't
require authors to spend ten minutes every fifty years to file a
single form.
-<indexterm><primary>veterans' pensions</primary></indexterm>
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
<!-- (4) -->
<section id="freefairuse">
<title>3. Free Use Vs. Fair Use</title>
<indexterm><primary>land ownership, air traffic and</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>property rights</primary>
- <secondary>air traffic vs.</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>property rights</primary><secondary>air traffic vs.</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
As I observed at the beginning of this book, property law originally
granted property owners the right to control their property from the
have the power to deny you the right to release that movie, even
though that movie is not <quote>my writing.</quote>
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Kaplan, Benjamin</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Congress granted the beginnings of this right in 1870, when it
expanded the exclusive right of copyright to include a right to
The courts have expanded it slowly through judicial interpretation
ever since. This expansion has been commented upon by one of the law's
greatest judges, Judge Benjamin Kaplan.
-<indexterm><primary>Kaplan, Benjamin</primary></indexterm>
</para>
<blockquote>
<para>
owner plainly endorses.
</para></listitem>
</orderedlist>
+<indexterm><primary>cassette recording</primary><secondary>VCRs</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>VCRs</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Any reform of the law needs to keep these different uses in focus. It
must avoid burdening type D even if it aims to eliminate type A. The
law should be to facilitate the access to this content, ideally in a
way that returns something to the artist.
</para>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>out of print</secondary>
-</indexterm>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>books</primary>
- <secondary>resales of</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>books</primary><secondary>out of print</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>books</primary><secondary>resales of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Again, the model here is the used book store. Once a book goes out of
print, it may still be available in libraries and used book
content providers on the Internet, we should find a relatively simple
way to compensate those who are harmed.
</para>
+<indexterm id='idxpromisestokeepfisher' class='startofrange'><primary>Promises to Keep (Fisher)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
The idea would be a modification of a proposal that has been
floated by Harvard law professor William Fisher.<footnote>
<para>
<!-- f9. -->
-<indexterm id='idxartistspayments3' class='startofrange'>
- <primary>artists</primary>
- <secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxartistspayments3' class='startofrange'><primary>artists</primary><secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary></indexterm>
William Fisher, <citetitle>Digital Music: Problems and Possibilities</citetitle> (last
revised: 10 October 2000), available at
<ulink url="http://free-culture.cc/notes/">link #77</ulink>; William
compensated. The compensation would be paid for by (4) an appropriate
tax.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Promises to Keep (Fisher)</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Fisher's proposal is careful and comprehensive. It raises a million
questions, most of which he answers well in his upcoming book,
longer necessary, then the system could lapse into the old system of
controlling access.
</para>
-<indexterm>
- <primary>artists</primary>
- <secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary>
-</indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxpromisestokeepfisher' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm><primary>artists</primary><secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
Fisher would balk at the idea of allowing the system to lapse. His aim
is not just to ensure that artists are paid, but also to ensure that
semiotic democracy if there were few limitations on what one was
allowed to do with the content itself.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Apple Corporation</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>MusicStore</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Real Networks</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>CDs</primary><secondary>prices of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
No doubt it would be difficult to calculate the proper measure of
<quote>harm</quote> to an industry. But the difficulty of making that calculation
there will be a great deal of competition to offer and sell music
on-line.
</para>
-<indexterm><primary>Asia, commercial piracy in</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>cable television</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>television</primary><secondary>cable vs. broadcast</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Asia, commercial piracy in</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>piracy</primary><secondary>in Asia</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>film industry</primary><secondary>luxury theatres vs. video piracy in</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
This competition has already occurred against the background of <quote>free</quote>
music from p2p systems. As the sellers of cable television have known
the unwillingness of the profession to question or counter that one
strong view queers the law.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Nimmer, Melville</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) (1998)</primary><secondary>Supreme Court challenge of</secondary></indexterm>
<para>
The evidence of this bending is compelling. I'm attacked as a
<quote>radical</quote> by many within the profession, yet the positions that I am
The law should regulate in certain areas of culture—but it should
regulate culture only where that regulation does good. Yet lawyers
-<!-- PAGE BREAK 311 -->
+<!-- PAGE BREAK 311-->
rarely test their power, or the power they promote, against this
simple pragmatic question: <quote>Will it do good?</quote> When challenged about
the expanding reach of the law, the lawyer answers, <quote>Why not?</quote>
</para>
<!-- insert endnotes here -->
+<?latex \theendnotes ?>
<!--PAGE BREAK 336-->
</chapter>
<index></index>
+<colophon>
+<para>
+THE PENGUIN PRESS, a member of Penguin Group (USA) Inc. 375 Hudson Street New
+York, New York
+</para>
+<para>
+Copyright © Lawrence Lessig. All rights reserved.
+</para>
+<para>
+Excerpt from an editorial titled <quote>The Coming of Copyright Perpetuity,</quote>
+<citetitle>The New York Times</citetitle>, January 16, 2003. Copyright
+© 2003 by The New York Times Co. Reprinted with permission.
+</para>
+<para>
+Cartoon in <xref linkend="fig-1711-vcr-handgun-cartoonfig"/> by Paul Conrad, copyright Tribune
+Media Services, Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.
+</para>
+<para>
+Diagram in <xref linkend="fig-1761-pattern-modern-media-ownership"/> courtesy of the office of FCC
+Commissioner, Michael J. Copps.
+</para>
+<para>
+Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
+</para>
+<para>
+Lessig, Lawrence.
+Free culture : how big media uses technology and the law to lock down
+culture and control creativity / Lawrence Lessig.
+</para>
+<para>
+Includes index.
+</para>
+<para>
+ISBN 1-59420-006-8 (hardcover)
+</para>
+
+<para>
+1. Intellectual property—United States. 2. Mass media—United States.
+</para>
+<para>
+3. Technological innovations—United States. 4. Art—United States. I. Title.
+</para>
+<para>
+KF2979.L47
+</para>
+<para>
+343.7309'9—dc22
+</para>
+
+<para>
+&translationblock;
+</para>
+
+<para>
+Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of
+this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a
+retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means
+(electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise),
+without the prior written permission of both the copyright owner and
+the above publisher of this book.
+</para>
+<para>
+The scanning, uploading, and distribution of this book via the
+Internet or via any other means without the permission of the
+publisher is illegal and punishable by law. Please purchase only
+authorized electronic editions and do not participate in or encourage
+electronic piracy of copyrighted materials. Your support of the
+author's rights is appreciated.
+</para>
+</colophon>
</book>
projects / text-free-culture-lessig.git / blobdiff