On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 01:41:49PM -0500, Timothy Phillips wrote:
>...
> If works of authorship are to be analogized to tangible property,
> then the copyright ITSELF is the payment for the work. This analogy
> was used by James Madison, one of the authors of the Constitution's
> monopolies clause, who wrote:
>
> "The Constitution of the United States has limited
> [monopolies] to two cases--the athors of Books, and
> of useful inventions, in both which they are considered
> as compensation for a benefit actually gained to the
> community as a purchase of property which the owner
> might otherwise withhold from public use."
>
> Note that for Madison, the work is PAID FOR with the copyright. It
> becomes "a benefit ... gained to community as a PURCHASE of property"
> -- in other words, it becomes analogous to public property.
>
> Madison did, however, propose a liquidation price to be attached to
> every copyright and patent in case the government should see a need
> to terminate the monopoly prematurely:
>
> "In all cases of monopoly, not excepting those in
> favor of authors and inventors, it would be well to
> reserve to the State, a right to extinguish the
> monopoly by paying a specified and reasonable sum.
> This would guard against the public discontents
> resulting from the exorbitant gains of individuals,
> and from the inconvenient restrictions combined with
> them."
>
> I don't think this would work in practice, but I find Madison's
> underlying presuppositions interesting. Note that Madison thinks
> that the premature liquidation price should be "specified", i.e.
> fixed in advanced; it should be "reasonable"; and one of its purposes
> is to PREVENT the copyright from bringing its holder "exorbitant
> gains". In other words, the overall value of the monopoly should
> be moderate.
>
> The quotations above are from James Madison, "Monopolies. Perpetuities.
> Corporations. Ecclesiastical Endowments.", published in _Harper's
> Monthly Magazine_, Vol. 128, No. 766, March, 1914, page 489ff, and
> in Elizabeth Fleet, "Madison's 'Detatched Memoranda'", _William and
> Mary Quarterly_, Third Series, Vol. 3, October, 1946, page 534 ff.,
> with the "Monopolies" essay beginning at page 551.
Thanks, Tim, for the interesting Madison references.
Perhaps his ideas would not work. But maybe there is
a way to meld some of his ideas with those of Linda.
Maybe the author could state a price for the copyright or
patent on the day she registers it. Taxes would then be
paid on the basis of that estimate. After say five years
the copyright holder would be authorized to receive that
initial amount as a tax deduction or the work automatically
falls into the public domain.
So if the author feels the work is particularly valuable
then more taxes are owed, but the author also receives
more after a short term expires.
The government pays for the work and the public does not
need to steal it. It enforces exclusive rights during the
short term. And the copyright holder does not have property
expropriated from her--instead she is paid for the work and
can use that payment as support to allow her to produce more.
Even if this particular trick doesn't work there may be
others that can revive the utility of copyright and increase
the likelihood of more creative output and less "piracy".
Received on Mon Aug 07 2000 - 15:27:18 GMT