DRAWBACKS OF COPYRIGHT AND THE EMERGENCE OF COPYLEFT

DRAWBACKS OF COPYRIGHT AND THE EMERGENCE OF

COPYLEFT

OVERVIEW

COPYRIGHT

ORIGIN & OBJECTIVES

COPYRIGHT TODAY

PROBLEMS

CULTURAL SOFTWARE

CREATIVE COMMONS− Lawrence Lessig

FREE SOFTWARE MOVEMENT

− Richard Stallman (GNU-GPL)

ALTERNATIVES

ORIGIN OF COPYRIGHT

Property and Law – Jeremy Bentham.

Intellectual Property.

The Patronage system - Artist lived on the largesse of his/her Patron.

Market economy in the 18th C meant a creation of a market space for Art. Rise of Copyright for Artist.

DANGER OF COPYRIGHT

In 1557, “Stationers Company” (Publisher) was awarded monopoly rights to print certain texts.

Herein lies the DANGER of Copyright. The danger of Monopolization.

STATUTE OF ANNE (1710)

Origin of Copyright law. Highlights:

Therefore, provided incentive for creation of art WITHOUT creating restrictive monopolies

Donaldson v. Beckett (1774) (98 Eng. Rep. 257) – Lord Camden:

“Knowledge has no value or use for the solitary owner; to be enjoyed it must be communicated”

1) Provided Copyright to AUTHOR not Publisher

2) Perpetual rights dropped. COPYRIGHT TERM introduced. [14 years + 14 years if the author was still alive]

OBJECTIVE OF COPYRIGHTS

Public Interest – Free Access to ideas.

Lack of Incentivisation - engendering of ideas itself may be endangered.

Danger – Monopolization.

Compromise - limited period Copyright.

Balancing Incentivisation with public good

COPYRIGHT TODAY

PROBLEMS

CULTURAL SOFTWARE

EXTENSIONS IN INDIA

Year Total (Years)

Pre-1992 The Copyright Act, 1957 Life + 50

Post- 1992 Amendment of 1992 Life + 60

Post- 2012 Copyright Amendment Act, 2012

Even photographs to get (life + 60) years.

PROGRESSIVE EXTENSION OF COPYRIGHT TERMS (US)

Year Copyright (Years)

Extension Possibility (Years)

Total (Years)

1790 14 14 281831 28 14 421909 28 28 561962-1976(11 Extensions)

Author’s life+50For Companies: 75

1998(Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act)

Life+70 years or 95 years for Corporate works

COPYRIGHT EXTENSION – PROS?

Copyright Extension

FOR EXISTING WORKS

Incentive Irrelevant!!

FOR PROSPECTIVE WORKS

Incentive ??

Justice Breyer: incentive worth 7 cents in the

present day

COPYRIGHT EXTENSION – CONS?

Problems are two-fold:

Ethical Problem Practical Problem

All works of art are a part of our common culture.

Orphaned Works.

Actual tangible loss.

Copyrighted works - ‘built on the past’.

Lost

50% of Pre-1950 works

80% of Pre-1929 works

SOFTWARE RELATED PROBLEMS

Apple Computer Inc., v. Frankline Computer Corporation, (714 F.2d 1240)

Held: the definition of “literary” includes computer programmes as "works of authorship".

“Section 2(o) in The Copyright Act, 1957 “‘literary work’ includes tables compilations and

computer programmes…”

WHY IS THIS PROBLEMATIC?

All information digitized – key in the hands of a few.

Copyrighted software code ensconces ideas and blocks access to matter which does not belong to the software coder.

ALTERNATIVES

Creative Commons

Founded by Lawrence Lessig.

While situated within Copyleft, it occupies more of a middle ground.

Offers different types of licenses, allowing creators to choose how they wish to share their works.

CREATIVE COMMON LICENSES

Creative Common Licenses:

Attribution (CC-BY) Attribution Share Alike (CC-BY-SA) Attribution No Derivatives (CC-BY-ND) Attribution Non-Commercial (CC-BY-NC) Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike (CC-BY-NC-

SA) Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives (CC-BY-

NC-ND)

E.g. Wikipedia – (CC-BY-SA)

Richard M. Stallman - Free Software Movement

Basic Tenets:0. freedom to use the work,1. freedom to study the work,2. freedom to copy and share the work with others,3. freedom to modify the work, and the freedom to distribute modified and therefore derivative works.

“ ‘Free’ as in ‘free speech’, not as in ‘free beer.’ ”

ALTERNATIVES

2012 AMENDMENT ACT

Section 21 – Relinquishment of Rights• Earlier: Form to the Registrar of Copyrights.• Now: Public notice.

Section 30• Earlier: Licenses were to be written and signed.• Now: Licenses need only to be written.

This puts Creative Commons, the GNU Public Licence, and other open licensing models, on a surer footing in India.

The basic aim of the Copyleft movement is to develop a more permissive regime that allows for the creation of a shared space of ‘commons’ from which everyone can derive benefit.

The fact that most of the current generation is guilty of copyright violations in some form or the other is indicative of an untenable legal position. The voices of the Copyleft must, therefore, be considered.

CONCLUSION

SOURCES

A lecture on “Free Culture, Copyright and the Creative Commons” by Lawrence Lessig at Stanford Law

School.

“Copyright, Copyleft & the Creative Anti-Commons” Text developed out of a series of conversations and correspondences between Joanne Richardson and Dmytri Kleiner.

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

‘Copyleft Society’ by Nagarjuna G.