18th-century American piracy of British literature

Last updated

18th-century American piracy of British literature refers to the practice of reprinting British books in the United States without the permission of the original author or publisher.

Contents

Plagiarism is traditionally defined as "the process of copying another person's idea or written work and claiming it as original" [1] This definition applies to many aspects of written work in today's world and has serious consequences if found guilty of committing it, but this idea has not always been in place. During the 18th century, it was extremely common for British Literature to be reprinted across the Atlantic Ocean in America without any acknowledgment or payment given to the original author. This form of plagiarism, referred to as literary piracy, was not an easy action to control because of the immense distance between the two countries, and the lack of any real international law which would work to protect the original authors in England. It was not until 1988 that these international laws were truly set in place and able to be enforced with any form of consistency.

Early piracy

Although it is now believed to be a crime, plagiarism has not always been considered a negative action. Thoughts, ideas, and writing were considered public property, not something an individual was able to claim as their own [2] The "borrowing" from others was thought of as a form of learning and was encouraged as an opportunity to enhance one's work. It was used as a stepping stone during the creative process. In order to create new stories, plots, and characters for a narrative, it was only natural for authors to look at what others before them had done. [3] The difference between this recycling of ideas and copying is that an author will add original material to the inspiration, not simply recopy what came prior. Borrowing was deemed acceptable if it is only part of the final result and has a distinct twist from the original piece. A prime example of accepted plagiarism can be found in Shakespeare, who "borrowed" from other authors and playwrights of his day in order to create almost all of his now famous plays. The term plagiarism originally comes from the Latin word for thief, in this case, a literary thief.

London was the first city where authors were able to rightly protect themselves and their ideas after the first copyright law, known as the Statute of Anne, passed in 1710. [2] The specific purpose of this statute was "the encouragement of learned men to compose and write useful books". [2] This act not only protected authors in Britain, it also worked to protect the authors who had works being brought across the Atlantic to be reprinted without receiving any compensation for their literature. In 1880 the first international copyright laws were proposed by Mr. Edward Thorton in order to prevent this piracy from occurring and establishing consequences if it did (5). This treaty gave British authors protection in America and vice versa, allowing for consequences to follow the rules for the country of original publication. Pirated copies of novels and musical pieces were prohibited. It took over 100 years after these laws were proposed for the United States to fully cooperate with them. [2]

International piracy

During the 18th century, the plagiarists and literary thieves (pirates) would bring British novels back to America, reprint them (with the original author's name in order to escape incrimination, but still using another author's work for their own personal gain), and yet never give the original author any compensation for their work. [2] This system fell into place largely because the nation did not have any real individual literary identity at that point in time. [4] During that period, the United States was still in the early stages of its independent development as a nation and most of what the new American public was comfortable with involved British culture and ideas. These pirated novels had already established a reputation and success in England and were therefore not a risk to publishers in the States, who already knew that there would likely be a success in the New World. In some cases, these pirated novels were more accessible in America than they were to the British where they were originally printed. [4] Although novels were a large portion of the pirated works from England, magazines, and newspapers were included in the stolen works as well.

One primary example can be seen in Harper's New Monthly Magazine , a magazine that was aimed at women and attempted to create a patriotic attitude in the developing nation. [4] Harper's ideas and strategies involved exposing these women to the British form of "elevated" culture in an effort to increase the standard and quality of the new American literature, which would result from the British inspiration they provided in their magazine. It was formerly believed that because of America's lack of a social class system, there would be no real need for a strong literary tradition. Harper's tried to expose the British tradition in order to facilitate growth for the American tradition. They sold for a low cost because there was no compensation being paid to the original authors back in England for the sole purpose of exposing every educated person in the new American public to "the unbounded treasures of the periodical literature of the present day". [4]

The important thing was not the actual content of the magazines or their national origin but more about how much circulation and exposure these pieces received. This feeling of inspiration eventually backfired when the American authors were intimidated by the intense connection and dependence on British authors and did not produce many. [4] Eventually, the resentment for the lack of Americanism led to a change in Harper's to include more national, not international, authors. This change never really paid off and the magazine did not see the same amount of success and profit that it received from the British pirated material.

Notes and references

  1. Guralnik, D: Webster's New World Dictionary, page 1087. Collins World 1976.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 Lynch, Jack (2002) The Perfectly Acceptable Practice of Literary Theft: Plagiarism, Copyright, and the Eighteenth Century, in Colonial Williamsburg: The Journal of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation 24, no. 4 (Winter 2002–3), pp. 51–54. Also available online since 2006 at Writing World.
  3. Stearns, Laurie: Copy wrong: plagiarism, process, property and the law, California Law Review 1992
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 Phegley, Jennifer: Literary Piracy, Nationalism, and Women Readers in Harper's New Monthly Magazine, 1850-1855 American Periodicals: A Journal of History, Criticism, and Bibliography, pages 63–90. The Ohio State University Press 2004.

Further reading

Related Research Articles

An author is the writer of a book, article, play, or other written work. A broader definition of the word "author" states:

A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives its owner the exclusive right to copy, distribute, adapt, display, and perform a creative work, usually for a limited time. The creative work may be in a literary, artistic, educational, or musical form. Copyright is intended to protect the original expression of an idea in the form of a creative work, but not the idea itself. A copyright is subject to limitations based on public interest considerations, such as the fair use doctrine in the United States.

Fair use is a doctrine in United States law that permits limited use of copyrighted material without having to first acquire permission from the copyright holder. Fair use is one of the limitations to copyright intended to balance the interests of copyright holders with the public interest in the wider distribution and use of creative works by allowing as a defense to copyright infringement claims certain limited uses that might otherwise be considered infringement. Unlike "fair dealing" rights that exist in most countries with a British legal history, the fair use right is a general exception that applies to all different kinds of uses with all types of works and turns on a flexible proportionality test that examines the purpose of the use, the amount used, and the impact on the market of the original work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criticism of copyright</span> Dissenting views of copyright law

Criticism of copyright, or anti-copyright sentiment, is a dissenting view of the current state of copyright law or copyright as a concept. Critics often discuss philosophical, economical, or social rationales of such laws and the laws' implementations, the benefits of which they claim do not justify the policy's costs to society. They advocate for changing the current system, though different groups have different ideas of what that change should be. Some call for remission of the policies to a previous state—copyright once covered few categories of things and had shorter term limits—or they may seek to expand concepts like fair use that allow permissionless copying. Others seek the abolition of copyright itself.

The history of copyright starts with early privileges and monopolies granted to printers of books. The British Statute of Anne 1710, full title "An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by vesting the Copies of Printed Books in the Authors or purchasers of such Copies, during the Times therein mentioned", was the first copyright statute. Initially copyright law only applied to the copying of books. Over time other uses such as translations and derivative works were made subject to copyright and copyright now covers a wide range of works, including maps, performances, paintings, photographs, sound recordings, motion pictures and computer programs.

<i>Free Culture</i> (book) Book by Lawrence Lessig

Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity is a 2004 book by law professor Lawrence Lessig that was released on the Internet under the Creative Commons Attribution/Non-commercial license on March 25, 2004.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright law of Canada</span>

The copyright law of Canada governs the legally enforceable rights to creative and artistic works under the laws of Canada. Canada passed its first colonial copyright statute in 1832 but was subject to imperial copyright law established by Britain until 1921. Current copyright law was established by the Copyright Act of Canada which was first passed in 1921 and substantially amended in 1988, 1997, and 2012. All powers to legislate copyright law are in the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada by virtue of section 91(23) of the Constitution Act, 1867.

Originality is the aspect of created or invented works that distinguish them from reproductions, clones, forgeries, or substantially derivative works. The modern idea of originality is according to some scholars tied to Romanticism, by a notion that is often called romantic originality. The validity of "originality" as an operational concept has been questioned. For example, there is no clear boundary between "derivative" and "inspired by" or "in the tradition of."

The Copyright Act of Canada is the federal statute governing copyright law in Canada. It is jointly administered by the Department of Industry Canada and the Department of Canadian Heritage. The Copyright Act was first passed in 1921 and substantially amended in 1988 and 1997. Several attempts were made between 2005 and 2011 to amend the Act, but each of the bills failed to pass due to political opposition. In 2011, with a majority in the House of Commons, the Conservative Party introduced Bill C-11, titled the Copyright Modernization Act. Bill C-11 was passed and received Royal Assent on June 29, 2012.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Copyright Act of 1891</span>

The International Copyright Act of 1891 is the first U.S. congressional act that extended limited protection to foreign copyright holders from select nations. Formally known as the "International Copyright Act of 1891", but more commonly referred to as the "Chace Act" after Sen. Jonathan Chace of Rhode Island.

The publishing industry in Pakistan is hampered both by a low literacy rate (65%).

Since first coming to wide notice in the late 1990s, the Harry Potter book series by J. K. Rowling has been the subject of a number of legal disputes. Rowling, her various publishers and Time Warner, the owner of the rights to the Harry Potter films, have taken numerous legal actions to protect their copyrights, and also have fielded accusations of copyright theft themselves. The worldwide popularity of the Harry Potter series has led to the appearance of a number of locally-produced, unauthorised sequels and other derivative works, leading to efforts to ban or contain them. While these legal proceedings have countered a number of cases of outright piracy, other attempts have targeted not-for-profit endeavours and have been criticised.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Derivative work</span> Expressive work created from a major part of a different, original artwork

In copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major copyrightable elements of an original, previously created first work. The derivative work becomes a second, separate work independent in form from the first. The transformation, modification or adaptation of the work must be substantial and bear its author's personality sufficiently to be original and thus protected by copyright. Translations, cinematic adaptations and musical arrangements are common types of derivative works.

Under the law of the United Kingdom, a copyright is an intangible property right subsisting in certain qualifying subject matter. Copyright law is governed by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended from time to time. As a result of increasing legal integration and harmonisation throughout the European Union a complete picture of the law can only be acquired through recourse to EU jurisprudence, although this is likely to change by the expiration of the Brexit transition period on 31 December 2020, the UK has left the EU on 31 January 2020. On 12 September 2018, the European Parliament approved new copyright rules to help secure the rights of writers and musicians.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright infringement</span> Usage of a copyrighted work without the authors permission

Copyright infringement is the use of works protected by copyright without permission for a usage where such permission is required, thereby infringing certain exclusive rights granted to the copyright holder, such as the right to reproduce, distribute, display or perform the protected work, or to make derivative works. The copyright holder is typically the work's creator, or a publisher or other business to whom copyright has been assigned. Copyright holders routinely invoke legal and technological measures to prevent and penalize copyright infringement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Plagiarism</span> Using another authors work as if it was ones own original work

Plagiarism is the fraudulent representation of another person's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions as one's own original work. Although precise definitions vary, depending on the institution, such representations are generally considered to violate academic integrity and journalistic ethics as well as social norms of learning, teaching, research, fairness, respect, and responsibility in many cultures. It is subject to sanctions such as penalties, suspension, expulsion from school or work, substantial fines, and even imprisonment.

File sharing in the United Kingdom relates to the distribution of digital media in that country. In 2010, there were over 18.3 million households connected to the Internet in the United Kingdom, with 63% of these having a broadband connection. There are also many public Internet access points such as public libraries and Internet cafes.

<i>Salinger v. Random House, Inc.</i> American legal case

Salinger v. Random House, Inc., 811 F.2d 90 is a United States case on the application of copyright law to unpublished works. In a case about author J. D. Salinger's unpublished letters, the Second Circuit held that the right of an author to control the way in which their work was first published took priority over the right of others to publish extracts or close paraphrases of the work under "fair use". In the case of unpublished letters, the decision was seen as favoring the individual's right to privacy over the public right to information. However, in response to concerns about the implications of this case on scholarship, Congress amended the Copyright Act in 1992 to explicitly allow for fair use in copying unpublished works, adding to 17 U.S.C. 107 the line, "The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors."

Paraphrasing of copyrighted material may, under certain circumstances, constitute copyright infringement. In most countries that have national copyright laws, copyright applies to the original expression in a work rather than to the meanings or ideas being expressed. Whether a paraphrase is an infringement of expression, or a permissible restatement of an idea, is not a binary question but a matter of degree. Copyright law in common law countries tries to avoid theoretical discussion of the nature of ideas and expression such as this, taking a more pragmatic view of what is called the idea/expression dichotomy. The acceptable degree of difference between a prior work and a paraphrase depends on a variety of factors and ultimately depends on the judgement of the court in each individual case.

The protection of intellectual property (IP) of video games through copyright, patents, and trademarks, shares similar issues with the copyrightability of software as a relatively new area of IP law. The video game industry itself is built on the nature of reusing game concepts from prior games to create new gameplay styles but bounded by illegally direct cloning of existing games, and has made defining intellectual property protections difficult since it is not a fixed medium.