• Flattr FoI: 
Falkvinge &Co. on Infopolicy
BEFORE-FALKVINGE-IF-ANY FALKVINGE &CO. ON
INFOPOLICY
Falkvinge on Infopolicy - Home
»
LadyLiberty

History of Copyright, part 4: The US and Libraries

19

Copyright Monopoly

Copyright Monopoly

When the United States was founded, the concept of monopolies on ideas was carried to the New World and debated intensely. Thomas Jefferson was a fierce opponent to the monster of monopolies on ideas. A compromise was reached.

Copyright didn’t originate in the United States, as we have seen. The idea had been there beforehand and the Founding Fathers carried the laws with them into their new country. The topic of monopolies on ideas, however, was a topic not easily settled. Jefferson wrote:

If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them … incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation.

In the end, the United States Constitution was the first one to specify the reason for copyrights (and patents!) to be granted. It is very clear and straigtforward in its justification for the existence of copyright in United States law:

…to promote the progress of the sciences and useful arts…

It is particularly notable that the purpose of the monopoly was not for any profession to make money, neither writer nor printer nor distributor. Instead, the purpose is exemplary in its clarity: the only justification for the monopoly is if it maximizes the culture and knowledge available to society.

Thus, copyright (in the US, and therefore predominantly today) is a balance between the public’s access to culture and the same public’s interest of having new culture created. This is tremendously important. In particular, note here that the public is the only legitimate stakeholder in the wording and evolution of copyright law: the monopoly holders, while certainly being benefactors of the monopoly, are not legitimate stakeholders and should have no say in its wording, just like a regiment town should have no say in whether that regiment is actually needed for national security.

It is useful to point at the wording of the US Constitution when people falsely believe that the copyright monopoly exists so that artists can make money. It never did, not in any country.

Meanwhile in the United Kingdom

In the meantime in the United Kingdom, books were still quite expensive, mostly because of the copyright monopoly. Book collections were only seen in rich men’s homes, and some started benevolently to lend books to the common people.

The publishers went mad about this, and lobbied Parliament to outlaw the reading of a book without first paying for their own copy. They tried to outlaw the public library before the library had even been invented. “Reading without paying first? That’s stealing from the authors! Taking the bread right out of their childrens’ mouths!”

But Parliament took a different stance, seeing the positive impact of reading on society. The problem perceived by Parliament was not the self-described eternal plight of the copyright monopolists, but the problem that rich men in society dictated who would read and who wouldn’t. It seemed beneficial to society to level the playing field: to create public libraries, accessible to poor and rich alike.

The copyright monopolists went absolutely ballistic when they heard about this idea. “You can’t let anybody read any book for free! Not a single book will be sold ever again! Nobody will be able to live off their writing! No author will write a single book ever again if you pass this law!”

Parliament in the 1800s was much wiser than today, however, and saw the copyright monopolists’ tantrum for what it was. Parliament took a strong stance that public access to knowledge and culture had a larger benefit to society than the copyright monopoly, and so in 1849, the law instituting public libraries in the UK was passed. The first public library opened in 1850.

And as we know, not a single book has been written ever since. Either that, or the copyright monopolists’ rant about nothing being created without a strong monopoly was as false then as it is when repeated today.

(Note: in some European countries, authors and translators get some pennies for every book lent from a library. It should be strongly noted that this is not a compensation for an imaginary loss of income, as if every reduction in the monopoly required compensation, but a national cultural grant which happens to measure popularity and therefore suitability for that grant using statistics from libraries. Besides, the grant appeared in the early 1900s, long after libraries.)

Meanwhile in Germany

Germany had no copyright monopoly during this time. Several historians argue that this led to the rapid proliferation of knowledge that enabled Germany to take the industrial lead over the United Kingdom — knowledge could be spread cheaply and efficiently. So in a way, Germany’s leapfrogging of the United Kingdom proved British Parliament right: the national interest of access to culture and knowledge does supersede the monopoly interest of the publishers.

Next: Moral Rights on the Continent.

Previously: The Monopoly Dies – And Rises.

Sources: I will need sourcing for several of the facts here that I have collected over my five years as party leader but don’t recall from where. I’ll come back with a summary of what I need pointers to last in this series. Specifically, I’m lacking sources for the quotes from the UK library debate here.

You've read the whole article. Why not subscribe to the RSS flow using your favorite reader, or even have articles delivered by mail?

About The Author: Rick Falkvinge

Rick is the founder of the first Pirate Party and is a political evangelist, traveling around Europe and the world to talk and write about ideas of a sensible information policy. He has a tech entrepreneur background and loves whisky.

Liked This?

TRANSLATIONS AVAILABLE
This article is also available in other languages: Spanish, Portuguese (Brazil), Spanish.

By participating in the discussion and posting here, you are placing your contribution in the public domain (CC0). If you are quoting somebody else, credit them.

Contributors take own responsibility for their comments.

19

  1. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by lillebrorsan, Razor. Razor said: Falkvinge: History of Copyright, part 4: The US and Libraries http://bit.ly/ejKGZ5 [...]

  2. 2
    Tomas Kronvall

    Distraherande typo:
    “Copyright didn’t origin in the United States”
    originate

  3. 3
    Rick Falkvinge

    Thanks. While I think that any noun can be verbed, in this case origin, if it’s distracting it’s bad for the message of the article. Changed.

  4. 4

    It’s true that “any noun can be verbed”, but only for new words. For example, you can “mail a friend” where the noun “mail” became the verb in the act of “mailing” when e-mail was introduced. However, you can’t apply this across the board for any type of English. It is most certainly incorrect to say “Copyright didn’t origin in” as origin is never used as a verb, and it is never used as a verb for the simple fact that there is already a verb with the same function: (to) originate.

    • 4.1
      Rick Falkvinge

      Hackers and nerds, on the other hand, have a culture of spending large attentivity to language rules and, coupled with a great deal of createhood, overutilizationship of language rules result and such words abound in nerd text and culture.

      See Jargon File, Overgeneralizinessitude for more examples.

  5. 5
    Carl

    Great text! Gives a very good explanation of the purpose of copyright – something that not many people seem to know about.

  6. 6
    Anders

    Should also point out that the “art” in “useful arts” probably doesn’t mean what people think it does today. “Art” is a contraction of artificial, and refers to man-made objects. “Useful arts”, in the context of the 1770′s US probably means tools, not entertainment.

  7. [...] much wiser than today, however, and saw the copyright monopolists’ tantrum for what it was. They decided that the public’s access to knowledge and culture had a greater value to society than a [...]

  8. [...] to the copyright conflict: creators, publishers, and the public. Ironically, the public is the only legitimate stakeholder in the monopoly’s [...]

  9. [...] 4 of a 7 part series on ‘The History of Copyright’ (difficult to understand. you may have to start from part 1 if it doesn’t make [...]

  10. [...] Germany didn’t have copyright monopoly laws at this point in time, and historians argue that was the direct cause of Germany’s engineering excellence overtaking that of the United [...]

  11. [...] History of copyright, part 4: the US and libraries (en español) [...]

  12. [...] History of copyright, part 4: the US and libraries (en español) [...]

  13. [...] (No obstante, ya las editoriales intentaron una vez prohibir por ley los préstamos de libros, argumentando que el que la gente se preste libros era robarle al autor, y que todo el mundo debería tener que [...]

  14. [...] works. (Nevertheless, publishers once demanded lending of books between people to be banned by law, arguing that lending books between people was stealing from the author, and that everybody must buy their [...]

Add a Comment

× 9 = 63  

On Facebook

Popular Articles

Adobe the leech - original photo by OakleyOriginals on Flickr
158

Swarm Economy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Swarm Economy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Money cut into pieces - Photo by Flickr user Tax Credits
71

Swarm Economy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Swarm Economy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

European Parliament
70

Pirate Parties

Pirate Parties

Librep July 12 frame
31

Civil Liberties

Civil Liberties

colorblindflag
20

United States – Zacqary Adam Xeper

United States – Zacqary Adam Xeper

solarroad
15

Swarm Economy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Swarm Economy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

peter_sunde_0237
11

Swarm Economy – Lionel Dricot

Swarm Economy – Lionel Dricot

More in Copyright Monopoly

Bottles of Snake Oil - Photo by Jagrap on Flickr
29

Copyright Monopoly – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Copyright Monopoly – Zacqary Adam Xeper

photo_10071_20090418-646x363
71

Copyright Monopoly – David Collier-Brown

Copyright Monopoly – David Collier-Brown

le_tresor_rackham_le_rouge_1280x1024
11

Copyright Monopoly – Lionel Dricot

Copyright Monopoly – Lionel Dricot

Books before copyright
99

Copyright Monopoly – Johnny Olsson

Copyright Monopoly – Johnny Olsson

Other Recent Headlines

Burned book
34

Civil Liberties – Henrik Alexandersson

Civil Liberties – Henrik Alexandersson

NSA Seal Holding the Heartbleed Logo
40

Infrastructure – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Infrastructure – Zacqary Adam Xeper

PPEU founding in European Parliament, March 21, 2014.
17

Pirate Parties

Pirate Parties

Bitcoin concept by Antanacoins. CC-By-SA, Flickr.
42

Cryptocurrency – Charlie Shrem

Cryptocurrency – Charlie Shrem

About The Author

Rick is the founder of the first Pirate Party and is a political evangelist, traveling around Europe and the world to talk and write about ideas of a sensible information policy. He has a tech entrepreneur background and loves whisky.

More On Infopolicy

facebook
12

Swarm Economy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Swarm Economy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

523377_63619557
4

Infopolicy – Henrik Brändén

Infopolicy – Henrik Brändén

National_Security_Agency_headquarters,_Fort_Meade,_Maryland_public_domain_image
149

Infopolicy – Christian Engström

Infopolicy – Christian Engström

"God Hates Signs" next to "God Hates Fags" protesters
8

Freedom of Speech – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Freedom of Speech – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Many different currencies - CC photo by epSos.de
45

Diversity – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Diversity – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Valve mechanism
92

Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Speech

Collaborative whiteboard at OuiShare 2012, full of wonderful ideas for venture capitalists to ruin - photo by Natalie Ortiz
14

Swarm Economy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Swarm Economy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Border Patrol In Montana
25

Activism – Travis McCrea

Activism – Travis McCrea

Spices - Marrakech 09 Souks
58

Swarm Economy

Swarm Economy

Screen Shot 2013-06-27 at 7.23.12 PM
33

Copyright Monopoly – Travis McCrea

Copyright Monopoly – Travis McCrea

An Ouya console and controller
15

Infopolicy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Infopolicy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Smári McCarthy
36

Privacy – Christian Engström

Privacy – Christian Engström

1984-ish poster from London's Public Transport
8

Privacy – Loz Kaye

Privacy – Loz Kaye

Man slamming his head on a desk in frustration - CC photo by Flickr user mbshane
36

Privacy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Privacy – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Graffiti of a man swinging a sledgehammer. CC photo by Flickr user 1llustr4t0r.com
48

Copyright Monopoly – Zacqary Adam Xeper

Copyright Monopoly – Zacqary Adam Xeper

This publication is protected under the Constitution of the Kingdom of Sweden. Any problem you have with this publication remains exclusively yours. Accountable publisher: Rick Falkvinge.
All text on this site is Public Domain / CC0 unless specifically noted and credited otherwise. Copy, remix, and inspire. (Troll policy.)
Log in | Original theme design by Gabfire themes (heavily modified)