The Uneasy Case for Copyright

Last updated

"The Uneasy Case for Copyright: A Study of Copyright in Books, Photocopies, and Computer Programs" was an article in the Harvard Law Review by future United States Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer in 1970, [1] while he was still a legal academic. The article was a challenge to copyright expansionism, which was just entering its modern phase, and was still largely unquestioned in the United States. It became one of the most widely cited skeptical examinations of copyright. [2]

In this piece, Breyer made several points:

There was a formal reply by law student Barry W. Tyerman in the UCLA Law Review , [3] and a rejoinder by Breyer, [4] but the article appears to have had little impact on copyright policy in the lead up to the Copyright Act of 1976.

Seventeen years later, in their mathematical law and economics article "An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law" (1989), William Landes and Richard Posner systematically analyzed each of Breyer's arguments and concluded that "they do not make a persuasive case for eliminating copyright protection." [5] In particular they noted that many of his arguments rested on imperfect copying technology, an argument which weakens with technological innovation.

Related Research Articles

Openlaw is a project at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School aimed at releasing case arguments under a copyleft license, in order to encourage public suggestions for improvement.

Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States upholding the constitutionality of the 1998 Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA). The practical result of this was to prevent a number of works from entering the public domain in 1998 and following years, as would have occurred under the Copyright Act of 1976. Materials which the plaintiffs had worked with and were ready to republish were now unavailable due to copyright restrictions.

Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court on December 12, 2000, that settled a recount dispute in Florida's 2000 presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. On December 8, the Florida Supreme Court had ordered a statewide recount of all undervotes, over 61,000 ballots that the vote tabulation machines had missed. The Bush campaign immediately asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the decision and halt the recount. Justice Antonin Scalia, convinced that all the manual recounts being performed in Florida's counties were illegitimate, urged his colleagues to grant the stay immediately. On December 9, the five conservative justices on the Court granted the stay for Bush, with Scalia citing "irreparable harm" that could befall Bush, as the recounts would cast "a needless and unjustified cloud" over Bush's legitimacy. In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that "counting every legally cast vote cannot constitute irreparable harm." Oral arguments were scheduled for December 11.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stephen Breyer</span> US Supreme Court justice from 1994 to 2022

Stephen Gerald Breyer is an American lawyer and jurist who served as an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1994 until his retirement in 2022. He was nominated by President Bill Clinton, and replaced retiring justice Harry Blackmun. Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was nominated by President Joe Biden, was his designated successor. Breyer was generally associated with the liberal wing of the Court. He is now the Byrne Professor of Administrative Law and Process at Harvard Law School.

The threshold pledge or fund and release system is a way of making a fundraising pledge as a group of individuals, often involving charitable goals or financing the provision of a public good. An amount of money is set as the goal or threshold to reach for the specified purpose and interested individuals will pitch in, but the money at first either remains with the pledgers or is held in escrow.

Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001), is an appeal of the United States Supreme Court case Hunt v Cromartie. The case defendant is Mike Easley, who became North Carolina governor following Jim Hunt. The court's ruling on April 18, 2001, stated that redistricting for political reasons did not violate Federal Civil Rights Law banning race-based gerrymandering..

<i>Bluebook</i> Style guide on legal citation

The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation is a style guide that prescribes the most widely used legal citation system in the United States. It is taught and used at a majority of U.S. law schools and is also used in a majority of federal courts. Legal publishers also use several "house" citation styles in their works. The Bluebook is compiled by the Harvard Law Review Association, the Columbia Law Review, the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, and the Yale Law Journal. Currently, it is in its 21st edition. Its name derives from the cover's color.

Stephen Fain Williams was a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit until his death from complications of COVID-19 on August 7, 2020.

Michael William McConnell is an American jurist who served as a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit from 2002 to 2009. Since 2009, McConnell has been a professor and Director of the Stanford Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School. He is also a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, and Senior Of Counsel to the Litigation Practice Group at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. In May 2020, Facebook appointed him to its content oversight board. In 2020, McConnell published The President Who Would Not Be King: Executive Power under the Constitution by Princeton University Press.

Golan v. Holder, 565 U.S. 302 (2012), was a Supreme Court case that dealt with copyright and the public domain. It held that the "limited time" language of the United States Constitution's Copyright Clause does not preclude the extension of copyright protections to works previously in the public domain.

<i>Active Liberty</i> 2005 book by Stephen Breyer

Active Liberty: Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution is a 2005 book by United States Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The general theme of the book is that Supreme Court justices should, when dealing with constitutional issues, keep "active liberty" in mind, which Justice Breyer defines as the right of the citizenry of the country to participate in government. Breyer's thesis is commonly viewed as a liberal response to originalism, a view espoused by Justice Antonin Scalia.

Benjamin Kaplan was an American copyright and procedure scholar and jurist. He was also notable as "one of the principal architects" of the Nuremberg trials. And as Reporter to the U.S. Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules, he played a pivotal role in the 1966 revisions to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, which transformed class action practice in the U.S.

Copyright in Historical Perspective is an influential work of copyright scholarship by Lyman Ray Patterson. The book traces the history of Anglo-Saxon copyright from the outgoing 15th century to the late 19th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard Posner</span> American judge (born 1939)

Richard Allen Posner is an American legal scholar who served as a federal appellate judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit from 1981 to 2017. A senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, Posner is a leading figure in the field of law and economics, and was identified by The Journal of Legal Studies as the most-cited legal scholar of the 20th century. He is widely considered to be one of the most influential legal scholars in the United States.

Posadas de Puerto Rico Associates v. Tourism Co. of Puerto Rico, 478 U.S. 328 (1986), was a 1986 appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States to determine whether Puerto Rico's Games of Chance Act of 1948 is in legal compliance with the United States Constitution, specifically as regards freedom of speech, equal protection and due process. In a 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court held that the Puerto Rico government (law) could restrict advertisement for casino gambling from being targeted to residents, even if the activity itself was legal and advertisement to tourists was permitted. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the Puerto Rico Supreme Court conclusion, as construed by the Puerto Rico Superior Court, that the Act and regulations do not facially violate the First Amendment, nor did it violate the due process or Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Eskridge</span> American legal scholar (born 1951)

William Nichol Eskridge Jr. is the John A. Garver Professor of Jurisprudence at Yale Law School. He is one of the most cited law professors in America, ranking fourth overall for the period 2016–2020. He writes primarily on constitutional law, legislation and statutory interpretation, religion, marriage equality, and LGBT rights.

Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., 564 U.S. 552 (2011), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a Vermont statute that restricted the sale, disclosure, and use of records that revealed the prescribing practices of individual doctors violated the First Amendment.

Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 568 U.S. 519 (2013), is a United States Supreme Court copyright decision in which the Court held, 6–3, that the first-sale doctrine applies to copies of copyrighted works lawfully made abroad.

Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc., 580 U.S. ___ (2017), was a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the court decided under what circumstances aesthetic elements of "useful articles" can be restricted by copyright law. The Court created a two-prong "separability" test, granting copyrightability based on separate identification and independent existence; the aesthetic elements must be identifiable as art if mentally separated from the article's practical use, and must qualify as copyrightable pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works if expressed in any medium.

Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., No. 18-1150, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding "whether the government edicts doctrine extends to—and thus renders uncopyrightable—works that lack the force of law, such as the annotations in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated" (OCGA). On April 27, 2020, the Court ruled 5–4 that the OCGA cannot be copyrighted because the OCGA's annotations were "authored by an arm of the legislature in the course of its legislative duties"; thus the Court found that the annotations fall under the government edicts doctrine and are ineligible for copyright.

References

  1. Stephen Breyer (1970). "The Uneasy Case for Copyright: A Study of Copyright in Books, Photocopies, and Computer Programs". Harvard Law Review. 84 (2): 281–355. doi:10.2307/1339714. JSTOR   1339714.
  2. Lange, David (2009). No law: intellectual property in the image of an absolute First Amendment. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Law Books. p. 346. ISBN   978-0-8047-6327-1. Though in form Breyer's essay was a modest work of scholarship, its implications were enormous and have proved long-lasting (and by no means merely because its author ascended to the Supreme Court bench). [...] In our view, Breyer's long-ago study continues to offer the basis for important countervailing arguments against the easy assumptions some economists have made (then and now) in favor of wider protection.
  3. Barry W. Tyerman (June 1971). "The Economic Rationale for Copyright Protection for Published Books: A Reply to Professor Breyer". UCLA Law Review. 18: 1100–1125.
  4. Stephen Breyer (October 1972). "Copyright: A Rejoinder". UCLA Law Review. 20: 75–83.
  5. Landes, William M.; Posner, Richard A. (1989). "An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law". Journal of Legal Studies. 18 (2): 325–363. doi:10.1086/468150.