The Origin of Two American Copyright TheoriesA Case of the Reception of English Law.docx
- 文档编号:13348650
- 上传时间:2023-06-13
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:21
- 大小:73.43KB
The Origin of Two American Copyright TheoriesA Case of the Reception of English Law.docx
《The Origin of Two American Copyright TheoriesA Case of the Reception of English Law.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《The Origin of Two American Copyright TheoriesA Case of the Reception of English Law.docx(21页珍藏版)》请在冰点文库上搜索。
TheOriginofTwoAmericanCopyrightTheoriesACaseoftheReceptionofEnglishLaw
TheOriginofTwoAmericanCopyrightTheories
--ACaseoftheReceptionofEnglishLaw--
HideakiShirata
http:
//orion.t.hosei.ac.jp/hideaki/twocopy.htm
1?
@TheOriginalConceptofCopyrightinEngland
TheconceptofcopyrightemergedinEnglandinthesixteenthcenturyfromthebylawsoftheguildthenmonopolisingthecountry'spublishingindustry.TheguildwasgrantedacharterofincorporationbyQueenMaryin1556andreorganiseditselfastheCompanyofStationersofLondon.WithofficialrecognitionoftheCompany'smonopoly,itsbylawsandconceptofcopyrightalsocamegraduallytobeacknowledgedasthoseofanofficialinstitute.Thequasi-rightknownasStationers'Copyrightwasbasedonroyalprerogativeorletterpatentcoveringtheentirepublishingindustryasanestate.Thismonopolywasassignedtoitsmembersasavirtualfreeholdinterest.AlthoughtheStationers'CopyrightwasbasedonaprerogativewhichlaiddownthreebasiccharacteristicsofAnglo-Americancopyright-namelythatregistrationisindispensableforitsprotection,copyrightwasavailablenotonlytotheauthorbutalsotopurchasers,anditremainsvalidforatermthatisamultipleofsevenyears-itgavenoconsiderationwhatsoevertotheauthor'sright [1].
Englandenactedtheworld'sfirstcopyrightlawin1710 [2].Thisstatutehaslongbeenconsideredaturningpointinthehistoryofcopyrightasitclearlyrecognisedtheauthor'sright.Contrarytothislong-standingbelief,however,thispaperwillargue,byathoroughinvestigationofthepurposeandlegislativerecordofthestatute,thatitwasinfactenactedfortheabolitionofstationer'smonopoly [3].
Withrespecttopurpose,thestatutegrantedanextensionoftheexistingmonopolyfor21yearsandanexclusiverightfornewworksforfourteenyearswithanoptiontorenewforthesameperiod.Moreover,thestatuteusedtheauthor'srightonlytojustifytheabolitionofthemonopoly.
Thisargumentcanbesupportedbythefollowingthreepoints.
First,apartdeletedfromtheoriginaldraftofthe1710statuteclearlyemphasisedthatauthorsweretobegivenpriorityoverotherswithrespecttocopyright.Parliamentaryrecordsrevealthatthisparticularpartwasremovedunderpressurefrommonopolisticbooksellers.
Whereas thelibertywhich Printers,Booksellers,andotherPersonshaveoflatefrequentlytaken in [theLibertyof]Printing,Reprinting,andPublishing,orcausingtobePrinted,ReprintedandPublishedBooks,andotherWritings,withouttheConsentofAuthors thereof,inwhomyeundoubtedPropertyofsuchBooksandWritingastheproductoftheirlearningandlabourremainsorofsuchpersonstowhomsuchAuthorsforgoodConsidera(c^)onshavelawfullytransferredtheirRightandtitlethereinisnotonlyarealdiscouragementtolearningingenerll[sic]whichinallCivilizedNationsoughttoreceiveyegreatestCountenanceandEncouragemt[sic]butitisalsoanotoriouslnvasionofyepropertyofyerightful [or]ProprietorsofsuchBooksandWritings,totheirverygreatDetriment,andtoooftentotheRuinofthemandtheirFamilies:
...
That whereanyAuthorshallhereafterComposeorwriteanybookorbooksandshallreservetohimselfyeCopyorCopiesofSuchbookorBooksshareorSharesthereofOranyBooksellerprinterorotherpersonwhohathalreadypurchasedoracquiredorshallhereafterpurchaseoracquireyeCopyorCopiesofanyBookorBooksShareorSharesthereofinOrdertoprintorreprintyesameThatinanyoreitheroftheseCases fromandaftertheThenthDayofApril,Onethousandsevenhandredandten,theAuthorofanyBookorBooksalreadyPrinted... [4]
Second,thereisthesimilaritybetweentheStatuteofMonopolyof1623 [5] andthe1710statute.TheStatuteofMonopolywas,needlesstosay,intendedtoabolishthemonopoliessorampantduringtheElizabethanage.Itallowed21-yearmonopoliesforexistingprivilegesgrantedwithoutspecifictermsand14-yearmonopoliesforforthcominginventions.ThestructureoftheStatuteofMonopolyissimilartothefirstsectionofthe1710statute.
Anactconcerningmonopoliesanddispensationswithpenallawsandtheforfeituresthereof,21Jac.1,c.3.
V....Andifthesameweremadeformorethanoneandtwentyyears,Thatthenthesameforthetermofoneandtwentyyearsonly,tobeaccountedfromthedateofthefirstletterspatentsandgrantsthereofmade,shallbeofsuchforceastheywereorshouldhavebeen,ifthesamehadbeenmadebutfortermofoneandtwentyyearsonly,andasifthisacthadneverbeenhadormade,andnoneother,VI.Providedalso,andbeitdeclaredandenacted,Thatanydeclarationbeforementionedshallnotextendtoanyletterspatentsandgrantsofprivilegeforthetermoffourteenyearsorunder,hereaftertobemade,ofthesoleworkingormakingofanymannerofnewmanufactrueswithinthisrealm,tothetrueandfirstinventorandinventorsofsuchmanufactures,...
AnActfortheEncouragementofLearning,byVestingtheCopiesofPrintedBooksintheAuthorsorPurchasersofsuchCopies,duringtheTimesthereinmentioned,8Anne,c.19.
...[T]heAuthorofanyBookorBooksalreadyPrinted,whohathnotTransferredtoanyothertheCopyorCopiesofsuchBookorBooks,ShareorSharesthereof,ortheBooksellerorBooksellers,PrinterorPrinters,orotherPersonorPersons,whohathorhavePurchasedorAcquiredtheCopyorCopiesofanyBookorBooks,inordertoPrintorReprintthesame,shallhavethesoleRightandLibertyofPrintingsuchBookandBooksfortheTermofOneandtwentyYears,...andnolonger;andthattheAuthorofanyBookorBooksalreadyComposedandnotPrintedandPublished,orthatshallhereafterbeComposed,andhisAssigneeorAssigns,shallhavethesoleLibertyofPrintingandReprintingsuchBookandBooksfortheTermofFourteenYears,toCommencefromtheDayoftheFirstPublishingthesame,andnolonger;...
Third,therearetheclaimsmadebyintellectualsaround1710.TheLicensingActof1662 [6],whichgavelegalauthoritytothemonopolyinthebooktrade,wasrepealedin1695.JohnLockecontributedmuchtowardsitsrepeal,writingtopeersintheHouseofLordsandstronglycondemningtherestrictionsonsciencecausedbytheprovisionsoftheActandthemonopoliesofStationersCompany.(See,AppendixA.)
Althoughthe1710statuteaimedtoabolishmonopolies,monopolisticbooksellersattemptedtoforgeacasewhichwouldnullifyitsschemeandprovideeternalprotectionfortheirbusinesses.Wecanseethatintheactionsbroughtafter1731whenstatutorycopyrightprotectionbegantoexpire.Theyevencolludedtoaccomplishtheirgoal [7].Aseriesoftheseactionsknownasthe``BattleoftheBooksellers''attractedconsiderablepublicattentioninLondon [8].
Suchactivitiesaimedatestablishingcopyrightasaneternalrightweremostapparentin Millarv.Taylor in1769 [9].AsaresultofthedecisionoftheKing'sBenchinthiscase,copyrightwasunderstood,forfiveyearsuntil1774,tobeakindofcommonlawrighteternalinnature.Inthiscase,SirWilliamBlackstoneandLordMansfieldmadeagreatcontributiontopromotingtheplaintiffs'cause.Blackstonehadpreviouslypublished CommentariesontheLawsofEngland [10] in1767inwhichheinterpretedcopyrightasalegalconceptforthefirsttime.CitingLockeannaturallawtheory [11],hedescribedcopyrightasakindofpersonalpropertyincommonlawonthegroundthatanykindofpublishedworkisbasedontheauthor'sbrainwork.Blackstonerevisedthedescriptiontoemphasisethedistinctionbetweenthecommonlawrightandstatutorycopyrightafterthe Millar casewasoverruledin Donaldsonv.Beckett in1774 [12].Thedistinctionwas,however,sotechnicalthatmostreadersfounditdifficulttocomprehend.(See, AppendixB.)
TheplotofthebooksellerswasultimatelydefeatedbythedecisionoftheHouseofLordsinthe Donaldson case,whichestablishedthebasicstructureoftheconceptofAnglo-Americancopyrightinthenineteenthcentury.Thatis,whenanauthorfixedhiscreationonatangiblemedium,heobtainedacommonlawrightthatiseternalinnature.However,hewouldlosethecommonlawrightafterthepublicationofhiscreationbecauseofloseingphysicaloccupancyorcontrolonthecreation.Toavoidthisinconvenience,astatuteestablishedprivilageormonopolythatexcludeothersfromutilizingauthor'sworkforlimitedterm.ThroughouttheBattleoftheBooksellers,ontheotherhand,lawyershadmaintainedthattheprincipleofcopyrightshouldbebasedonLockeannaturallawtheoryandthisassertioncamegraduallytoreceivesomedegreeofpublicrecognition.
2?
@TheReceptionofCopyrightLawinAmerica
ThecolonialgovernmentofMassachusettsenactedin1672alawthatcanberegardedasthefirstcopyrightlawinBritishterritoryontheAmericancontinent.ThereisnoevidencethattheAmericancolonieshadanyothercopyrightstatutesafterthatuntilthe1780s.Thereasonforitsabsencecanbeexplainedbyfollowingthreepoints.First,despitethefactthatworksofAmericanauthorswerepublishedinAmerica,thenumberofworkswaslimitedandalargeproportionoftheAmericanmarketwasdominatedbyBritishauthors.Second,authorsincolonieswerealsoeditorsandpublishers.Therewasasentimentortraderulecalled``courtesycopyright''or``mutualobligation''amongpublishers,whicheffectivelysuppressedpiracy.Third,therewaslittleornoconflictofmarketshareamongpublishersonaccountoftheextensiveandgrowingAmericanmarket.Themarketwasalsostrictlysegmented.Eachpublisheroftensupporteda
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- The Origin of Two American Copyright TheoriesA Case Reception English Law
链接地址:https://www.bingdoc.com/p-13348650.html