© 2003 by The New York Times Co. Reprinted with permission.
</para>
<para>
-Cartoon in <xref linkend="fig-1711"/> by Paul Conrad, copyright Tribune
+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"/> courtesy of the office of FCC
+Diagram in <xref linkend="fig-1761-pattern-modern-media-ownership"/> courtesy of the office of FCC
Commissioner, Michael J. Copps.
</para>
<para>
<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='idxpower' class='startofrange'><primary>power, concentration of</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxpower
concentrationof' 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>
you—whether or not you care about the Internet, and whether you're on
Safire's left or on his right.
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxpower' class='endofrange'/>
+<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
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='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='idxprop
rigtair' class='startofrange'><primary>property rights</primary><secondary>air traffic vs.</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxairtraffic
landownershipvs' class='startofrange'><primary>air traffic, land ownership vs.</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxlandownership
airtrafficand' class='startofrange'><primary>land ownership, air traffic and</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxprop
ertyrightsairtrafficvs' 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
</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'/>
<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
culture, more and more a permission culture.
</para>
<!-- PAGE BREAK 24 -->
+<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
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
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
<indexterm><primary>ASCAP</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Dreyfuss, Rochelle</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Girl Scouts</primary></indexterm>
-<indexterm id='idxifvalue' class='startofrange'><primary><quote>if value, then right</quote> theory</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 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=
'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
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>
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='idxcameratech' class='startofrange'><primary>camera technology</primary></indexterm>
-<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
Based on a chart in Jenkins, p. 178.
</para></footnote>
</para>
-<indexterm startref='idxcameratech' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>Coe, Brian</primary></indexterm>
<para>
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>
<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>
<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 startref='idxdisneywalt4' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm><primary>images, ownership of</primary></indexterm>
<para>
Fortunately for Mr. Eastman, and for photography in general, these
(1993).
</para></footnote>)
</para>
+<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><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><primary>camera technology</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm startref='idxphotography' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxeastmangeorge' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxpermissionsphotographyexemptedfrom' class='endofrange'/>
<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'/>
<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>
<para>
This may seem like an odd way to think about <quote>literacy.</quote> For most
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 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 -->
</para>
<indexterm startref='idxblogs1' class='endofrange'/>
<indexterm startref="idxwinerdave" class='endofrange'/>
-<indexterm id=
"idxbrownjohnseely" class='startofrange'><primary>Brown, John Seely</primary></indexterm>
+<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
<chapter label="3" id="catalogs">
<title>CHAPTER THREE: Catalogs</title>
<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>
<para>
<emphasis role='strong'>In the fall</emphasis> of 2002, Jesse Jordan
of Oceanside, New York, enrolled as a freshman at Rensselaer
<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>
(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>
<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>
<para>
The law soon resolved this battle in favor of the composer
<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.
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. -->
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
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
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><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>
<para>
There was no <emphasis>positive</emphasis> law, but that didn't mean
Statute of Anne copyright had expired. This, they argued, was the only
way to protect authors.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Patterson, Raymond</primary></indexterm>
<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.
(London: Routledge, 1992), 62–69.
</para></footnote>
</para>
+<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>
<para>
When the London booksellers tried to shut down Donaldson's shop in
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>
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><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
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'/>
<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.
copyrighted material you need the permission of the copyright owner,
unless <quote>fair use</quote> or some other privilege applies.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Gracie Films</primary></indexterm>
<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><primary>Gracie Films</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>
<para>
Then, as Else told me, <quote>two things happened. First we discovered
to Herrera told Else later on, <quote>They don't give a shit. They just want
the money.</quote>
</para>
+<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>
<para>
There's no doubt that someone, whether Matt Groening or Fox, owns the
</para></listitem>
<listitem>
<indexterm><primary><citetitle>Star Wars</citetitle></primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Lucas, George</primary></indexterm>
<para>
<!-- 2. -->
I probably never should have asked Matt Groening in the first
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. -->
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 -->
Here's the metaphor that will capture the argument to follow.
</para>
<indexterm id="idxddt" class='startofrange'><primary>DDT</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Müller, Paul Hermann</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
</para></footnote>
These two different uses of my creative work are treated the same.
</para>
+<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
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
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>
if you push the Read Aloud button with my book, the machine simply
won't read aloud.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Marx 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><primary>Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (Carroll)</primary></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
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.
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
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>
</figure>
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,
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>
</figure>
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>
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>
work spread across the Internet. But as the law is currently crafted, this
work is presumptively illegal.
</para>
+<indexterm><primary>Worldcom</primary></indexterm>
<para>
That presumption will increasingly chill creativity, as the
examples of extreme penalties for vague infringements continue to
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>
<indexterm><primary>Hummer, John</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Barry, Hank</primary></indexterm>
<indexterm><primary>Hummer Winblad</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>EMI</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Universal Music Group</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
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>
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
the story of the demise of Internet radio.
</para>
<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
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
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>
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
(<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
are also specific— by <quote>securing</quote> <quote>exclusive Rights</quote> (i.e.,
copyrights) <quote>for limited Times.</quote>
</para>
+<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>
<para>
As an academic, my first response was to hit the books. I remember
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
<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
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
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>
<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>
<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
</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
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
noticed. Powerful lobbies, complex issues, and MTV attention spans
produce the <quote>perfect storm</quote> for free culture.
</para>
+<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><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>
-<indexterm><primary>Wellcome Trust</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
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><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><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
by the costs that friction imposes on anyone who would want to spy.
</para>
<indexterm><primary>Amazon</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>cookies, Internet</primary></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>
<para>
Amazon, of course, is not the problem. But we might begin to worry
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>
<para>
The aim is not to fight the <quote>All Rights Reserved</quote> sorts. The aim is to
<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) -->
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>
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>
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 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
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-->
projects / text-free-culture-lessig.git / blobdiff