Re: Author's Rights

On 9 Apr 1996, Martha Luehrmann wrote:
>
> In order to foster creativity you must compensate the creators. In a
> market economy that means you must give them some control over the
> market for their works. You can no longer depend on the difficulty
> of copying to give that market protection. In fact, the Statute of
> Anne was a recognition that the technology advances of that time (the
> printing press) had outstripped the means of protection afforded in
> the previous eras.

I disagree that the Statute of Anne was a recognition that technological change had outstripped the means of protections. The granting of the charter of the Stationers' Company in the 16th century and the subsequent relations between the English Crown and the Stationers' Company are the first means of extending protection after the invention of the printing press. The Statue of Anne was a means to break up the monopoly that the members of the Stationers' Company held over the printing and distribution of books. Copyright changes not only in response to technological change, but also to social change (in this case the resentment of monopolies).

> Our problem today is that technology has once again outstripped our
> means of protecting the rights to creative works. We cannot go back
> to the technologically dependent methods of protecting creative works
> that existed pre-1710. In fact, new technological advances have made
> it necessary for us to once again rethink how we can give a measure
> of protection to the creators, while not stifling public access to
> the works. We need some way to control and charge for minor uses of
> materials or portions of materials, like picking up a quote off the
> internet, playing a soundbite, running a piece of software, or showing
> some or all of a picture.

We can't get away from technologically dependent methods. If we want to have some method of charging for minor uses we will also have to have some method for collecting those charges. The most obvious method (at least to me) would be one that was tied to the technology used to make the copies (i.e. computers and computer networks). There may also have to be changes to the laws and international conventions that govern copyright, but these by themselves will not be enough. Complementary changes to the technology will also be required.

                            Steven Bosnick
                         sbosnick[_at_]uoguelph.ca
                                                            VP External
Philosophy Department                    Graduate Students' Association
University of Guelph                               University of Guelph