William Patry - How to Fix Copyright-Oxford University Press, USA (2012)资料下载.pdf

William Patry - How to Fix Copyright-Oxford University Press, USA (2012)资料下载.pdf

《William Patry - How to Fix Copyright-Oxford University Press, USA (2012)资料下载.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《William Patry - How to Fix Copyright-Oxford University Press, USA (2012)资料下载.pdf（336页珍藏版）》请在冰点文库上搜索。

754ThePublicInterest1315LawIsNottheSolutiontoBusinessProblems1416DoesDeterrenceWork?

1637AbandoningExclusivityandGettingPaidInstead177viiiCONTENTS8TheLengthofCopyrightIsDamagingOurCulturalHeritage1899ReimposingSomeFormalities20310TheMoralPanicoverFairUse21111“TheAnswertotheMachineIsintheMachine”IsaReallyBadMetaphor23112EffectiveGlobalCopyrightLaws245Notes263Index319AcknowledgmentsIthankNikoPfund,OxfordUniversityPressspresident,andpub-lisherofacademicandtradebooks,aswellasDavidMcBride,myeditoratOUP,fortheirinsightsandtimespenttighteningupanunwieldymanuscript.ThetitleisNikos.BothNikoandDavidarerealbookpeople,andareajoytoworkwith.Inalphabeticalorder:

NickAshton-Harthelpedmeseethingsbetterfromtheindividualcreatorsperspective,andalsotightenedthingsup.Pro-fessorJamesBoylesavedmefromhyperbolethatweakenedmyargument.ProfessorsDanielGervaisandStefvonGompelgavemeexcellentcommentsfromaninternationalperspective.GeorgeLakoffreadvariousversionsofthemanuscriptandgreatlyhelpedmefocusmyanalysis.TomOlsonlookedatthewholemanuscriptandcaughtmanyerrors.WillPageschallengestobroad-brushedconclusionssavedmemuchembarrassment.ProfessorRandallPickeroftheUniversityofChicagoLawSchoolandhisWinter2010technologypolicyclassreadthemanuscript,andputmethroughthewringer.IrwinStelzercarefullyreadthemanuscriptnumeroustimesandgavemeinvaluable,detailedcomments.HannuWagnerprovidedimportantinsightsintotherelationshipxACKNOWLEDGMENTSbetweeninternationalanddomesticcopyrightlaws.Allerrorsaremine.JulianaCunhatookthephotographforthebookjacket,whichisatake-offonpicturesofmulti-instrumentalistRahsaanRolandKirk.LisaForcedesignedthecover.Ididtheindex,whichcon-tainssomehumor.ThanksalsotoAmyWhitmer,mylong-suffer-ingproductioneditor,whomadesurethebookactuallycameout.DisclaimerAlthoughIserveasSeniorCopyrightCounseltoGoogleInc.,theviewsinthisbookareentirelymine,andshouldnotbeattributedtoGoogle.ThebookisnotGooglesbook,nordidIwriteitasaGoogleemployeeortoadvanceGooglesinterests,asmuchasIidentifywithandvaluethoseinterests.Instead,Iwrotethebookonmyowninitiativetomakepersonalobser-vationsobservationsthatcomefrombeingafull-timecopy-rightlawyerforthirtyyears,twenty-fiveofwhichoccurredbeforeIjoinedGoogle.IdidsendthemanuscripttoabouttwentypeoplewithinGoogle（andtosomepeopletwice）,butaswithmyMoralPanicsandtheCopyrightWarsbook,notasingleGoogleemployeegavemeanycommentsonit.Iwouldhavelovedsuchcomments,nottoensurethatthebooksomehowalignswithGooglesinterests,butbecausemycolleaguesarereallysmart,insightfulpeople.Inshort,Googledoesnotendorsethisbook,doesnotsharetheviewsexpressedinthisbook（andmayevenstronglyobjecttosomepassages）,sopleasedontprefaceanydis-cussionofthisbookwith:

“GooglesSeniorCopyrightCounselsaid,”oranyothervariant.Itsmybookalone.ThispageintentionallyleftblankIntroduction:

UnlearningCopyrightMylatemother,zikhronahlivrakha,taughtmethatIhaveareli-giousdutytolearneveryday.ThisisTorahlishma,learningforlearningssake.Infulfillingthisduty,Ihavediscoveredthatformethemostimportanttypeoflearningisnotlearningnewthings（asfunasthatis）,butratherunlearningthingsIthoughtIknewbutdidnt.1Unlearningrequiresreexaminingbeliefsweholddear,andonoccasionadmittingwewerewrong.Socratesthoughttheunexaminedlifenotworthliving.2Self-examinationoccursonlyifwerigorouslyinquireintoourhabits,includinghabitsofmind.Amongthehabitsofmindthisbookexaminesarethefundamentalbeliefsthatcopyrightlawsdi-rectlycausepeopletocreateworkstheywouldntotherwisecreate,directlyputsubstantialmoneyinauthorspockets;

thatculturedependsoncopyright;

and,morerecently,thatcopyrightlawisakeydriverofcompetitivenessandoftheknowledgeeconomy.2HOWTOFIXCOPYRIGHTDocopyrightlawscausethesewonderfulthingstocometrueinreallifeandnotjustinourbeliefs?

Simplybelievingthingswillhappenisntenough.Ifwewantwonderfulthingstocometrue（andwhodoesnt?

）wemustdomorethanbelievethattheywill;

wemustensuretheydo.Ensuringtheydorequires,ataminimum,thatcopyrightlawsareconsistentwithprevailingmarketsandtechnologies.Lawsmustbeconsistentwithprevail-ingmarketsandtechnologiesbecausetechnologiesplayalarge（althoughnotexclusive）roleincreatingconsumerdemand;

mar-ketsthensatisfythatdemand.Withoutconsumerdemandforyourbookormusicalwork,owningacopyrightismeaningless.Lawscannotcreateconsumerdemand,buttheycangreatlyin-terferewiththeabilityofmarketactorstosatisfythatdemand.Hence,theneedforlawtobeconsistentwithprevailingmarketsandtechnologies.Myconclusionisthatmarketforcesandtechnologyhavemovedwellbeyondourcurrentlawsandarenowinconflictwiththem.Copyrightlawsaroseoutofeighteenth-centurymarketsandtechnologies,themostimportantcharacteristicofwhichwasartificialscarcity.Artificialscarcitywascreatedbyasmallnumberofgatekeepers,byrelativelyhighbarrierstoentry,andbyanaloglimitationsonunauthorizedcopying.Artificialscarcitywasim-portantbecauseitcreatedmonopolyvalue:

notprofitsearnedabovecostsofproduction,butratherprofitsdisconnectedtocosts.Thoseprofitsweredependentonthecreationandlegalenforce-mentofartificialscarcitythroughcopyrightlaws.Thisistheenvi-ronmentinwhichcopyright,atleastAnglo-Americancopyright,arose.Butmarketsandtechnologieschange,inasymbioticway.Newtechnologiescreatenewdemand,requiringnewbusinessmodels:

Evenartificialscarcityisworthlessifnoonewantsyourproductinthefirstplace.Newmarketsareaneconomicfactoflife,andINTRODUCTION:

UNLEARNINGCOPYRIGHT3sometimesunpleasantlysowhentheycauseunemploymentinlegacybusinesses.Buggywhipmakers,however,couldnomoreclaimarighttoacontinuedmarketaftertheModelTcarelimi-natedthedemandforhorse-drawncarriagesthanmusicianswhoaccompaniedsilentmovieshadarighttobepaidafterthetalkiesmadetheirperformancesunnecessary.Nocopyrightlawcanpre-servemarketsthathavebeenpassedby.ThenewmarketscreatedbytheInternetanddigitaltoolsarethegreatestever:

Barrierstoentryarelow,costsofproductionanddistributionarelow,thereachisglobal,andlargesumsofmoneymaybemadeoffofamultitudeofsmalltransactions.Thiscon-trastsdramaticallywiththeworldofanalogartificialscarcity,whichbasedsalesonasmallnumberofexpensivetransactions,asituationthatfavoredgatekeepersoverindividuals.Thedemocra-tizationofcreationhasarrivedthankstodigitalabundancereplac-inganalogartificialscarcity.Policymakersshouldbeencouragingfurtherdevelopmentinthisarea,butfartoooften,aftertheoblig-atory,floweryrhetoricpraisingnewmarketsandtechnologiesismade,policymakersactionsgointheoppositedirection:

Ill-thought-outlawsarepassedwiththetypeofrighteousfervorusuallyreservedforevangelicalprophetsproclaimingtheendoftheworld.Whythisschizophreniaamongtheworldspolicymakers?

Theanswerissimple:

theInternetandotherdigitaltechnologieshaveunderminedthecentralpremisearoundwhichcopyrightmarketshavehistoricallybeenbuilt:

artificialscarcity.Thecentralpurposeofcopyrighthasbeentoenablecopyrightownerstocontrolmar-kets,andincontrollingthemtomakemonopolyprofitsbysellingfewerworksformoremoney.Artificialscarcityalsoincludedmar-ketsbeingsegmentedgeographically（Hollywoodmoviesarere-leasedfirstintheUnitedStates,andthenonascheduleinforeigncountries）,overtime（firstmovietheatres,thenhomevideos,then4HOWTOFIXCOPYRIGHTtelevision,thenairplanes）,andbyformat（consumershavetobuyseparatecopiesofmusicalworksforeachtypeofdevicetheywanttolistentotheworkson,andwheretheywanttolistentothem）.Copyrightandanalogtechnologicalconstraintsmadepossiblesuchbalkanizedmarketsandwasteful,duplicativepurchasesbyconsumers.Copyright=control=monopolyprofitshasbeenthecentraleconomicequationandthereforethefocalpointofcopy-rightowners.Unauthorizedcopyinghasalwaysbeenarhetoricalbogey-manemployedforthepurposeofensuring