A defense of the public domain: A scholarly essay

Law Library Journal

Volumn 101, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 451-470

  Gasaway, Laura N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 73949087279     PISSN: 00239283     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (109)

1. J. THOMAS MCCARTHY ET AL., MCCARTHY'S DESK ENCYCLOPEDIA OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 489 (3d ed. 2004).
2. U.S. CONST., art I, § 8, cl. 8.
3. Act of May 31, 1790, ch. 15, 1 Stat. 124.
4. The number of works distributed via the Internet may be increasing, due to developments such as YouTube. Creative Commons offers a variety of types of licenses that creators may adopt to claim less than the full panoply of rights provided under the copyright statute. See infra ¶ 23 for more information about Creative Commons licenses.
5. Act of May 31, 1790, § 1.
6. Act of Feb. 3, 1831, ch. 16, 4 Stat. 436.
7. Act of Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 320 § 23, 35 Stat. 1075, 1080.
8. 17 U.S.C. §§302(a) & (c) (2006).
9. 17 U.S.C. § 302(e) (1976) (containing the statutory presumption of the author's death seventy-five years after the work is published absent anything in the Copyright Office's records to the contrary).
10. Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, Pub. L. No. 105-298 § 102(b), 112 Stat. 2827, 2827(1998).
11. EDWARD RAPPAPORT, COPYRIGHT TERM EXTENSION: ESTIMATING THE ECONOMIC VALUES 4 (CRS Report No. 98-144E, 1998).
12. Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186, 268 (2003) (appendix to opinion of Breyer, J., dissenting).
13. That is, at the end of 1998, all of the works published in 1923 should have entered the public domain; in 1999, all of the works published in 1924, etc.
14. LAWRENCE LESSIG, FREE CULTURE 134-35 (2004).
15. 17 U.S.C. § 301(b)(2) (2006).
16. Id. § 303(a).
17. 248 U.S. 215, 250 (1918) (Brandeis J., dissenting).
18. Id.
19. BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 1349 (9th ed. 2009).
20. MCCARTHY ET AL., supra note 1, at 489.
21. Jessica Litman, The Public Domain, 39 EMORY L.J. 965, 974 (1990).
22. Professor Litman characterizes authorship as "a combination of absorption, astigmatism, and amnesia." Id. at 1011. She further posits that this characterization does not diminish the creative process but merely describes how authors actually produce works.
23. See STEPHEN FISHMAN, THE PUBLIC DOMAIN: HOW TO FIND & USE COPYRIGHT-FREE WRITINGS, MUSIC, ART & MORE, 4-5 (3d ed. 2006) (discussing the benefits of the public domain).
24. Id. at 214.
25. See 17 U.S.C. § 102(b) (2006).
26. See e.g., Egner v. E.C. Schirmer Music Co., 48 F. Supp. 187, 189 (D. Mass. 1942), aff'd 139 F.2d 398 (1st Cir. 1943).
27. Creative Commons, Copyright-Only Dedication (based on United States law) or Public Domain Certification, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain (last visited July 7, 2009).
28. Creative Commons, About, http://creativecommons.org/about (last visited July 7, 2009).
29. Creative Commons, Public Domain Tools, http://creativecommons.org/ publicdomain (last visited July 7, 2009).
30. Creative Commons, License Statistics, http://wiki.creativecommons.org/ License-statistics (last visited July 7, 2009).
31. 17 U.S.C. § 105 (2006).
32. See Act of May 31, 1790, ch. 15 § 5, 1 Stat. 124, 125.
33. A dispute with Charles Dickens is one of the most famous. See Boz in Egypt, ILL. HERITAGE, July-Aug., 2007, at 8, 8.
34. Act of Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 320 § 9-10, 35 Stat. 1075, 1077-78.
35. Baker v. Selden, 101 U.S. 99 (1879).
36. This continues today. See 17 U.S.C. § 102(b) (2006).
37. Litman, supra note 21, at 992.
38. Id. at 995.
39. Kevin Kelly, Scan This Book!, N.Y. TIMES, May 14, 2006, § 6 (Magazine), at 43.
40. See U.S. Copyright Office, Current Fees, http://www.copyright.gov/ docs/fees.html (last visited July 7, 2009).
41. Examples include Copyright Resources, http://www.copyright-resources.com (last visited July 7, 2009) and I.P. Paralegal Services, http://gawain.membrane. com/paralegals/copyrights.html (last visited July 7, 2009).
42. FISHMAN, supra note 23, at 521 app.A (listing songs in the public domain).
43. Public Domain Information Project, Lists of Public Domain Songs, http://www.pdinfo.com/list.php (last visited July 7, 2009);
44. Index of Public Domain Resources, http://banis-associates.com/pdlist (last updated Mar. 10, 1998);
45. Public Domain Movies, http://www.desertislandfilms.com/clindex.html (last visited July 7, 2009).
46. Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988 c. 48, § 165 (Eng.).
47. STEPHEN FISHMAN, COPYRIGHT AND THE PUBLIC DOMAIN § 102 [2] (2009). See Bridgeman Art Library, Ltd. v. Corel Corp., 36 F. Supp. 2d 191 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) (holding that photographic reproductions of art works in the public domain were not covered by copyright under either U.S. or U.K. law). This applies only to two-dimensional works and not photographs of three-dimensional works such as sculpture.
48. 17 U.S.C.§ 506(c) (2006).
49. FISHMAN, supra note 45, at § 102[2] (2009).
50. See Computer & Commun'ns Indus. Ass'n, CCIA Files FTC Complaint against NBC/Universal, MLB, the NFL and Others Alleging Years of Consumer Deception (Aug. 1, 2007), http://www.ccianet.org/artmanager/publish/ news/FTC-copyright-complaint.shtml.
51. Computer & Commun'ns Indus. Ass'n, Request for Investigation and Complaint for Injunctive and Other Relief 2 (Aug. 1, 2007), available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/070801CCIA.pdf.
52. Id.
53. See Memorandum from Mary K. Engle, Assoc. Dir., Div. of Advertising Practices, Fed. Trade Comm'n to Edward J. Black & Matthew Schruers, Computer & Commun'ns Indus. Ass'n (Dec. 6, 2007), available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/closings/staff/071206ccia.pdf.
54. CCIA Monitors Copyright Overreaching, Posting to Tech Policy Central, http://community.techpolicycentral.com/-CCIA-Monitors-Copyright-Overreaching/ blog/31332/11451.html (last visited Sept. 4, 2009) (quoting a Feb. 25, 2008 CCIA press release).
55. Berkeley attorney Kate Spelman reported that at least in one instance she was able to place a work in the public domain for a client. It required registration of the work with the Copyright Office and the filing of a document recorded with the same office that expressly dedicates the work to the public domain. She said that although it was time-consuming, it could be done. E-mail from Kate Spelman to Laura Gasaway, May 5,2009 (on file with author).
56. When the United States joined the Berne Convention, it was required to eliminate the notice requirement. See Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-568 § 7, 102 Stat. 2853,2857(1988).
57. See infra ¶ 47.
58. Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, art. 5, § 2, Sept. 9, 1886, Paris Act of July 24,1971, as amended on Sept. 28,1979, S. Treaty Doc 99-27, available at http://www.wipo.int/export/ sites/www/treaties/en/ip/berne/pdf/trtdocs-wo001.pdf.
59. See Lotte E. Feinberg, FOIA, Federal Information Policy, and Information Availability in a Post-9/11 World, 21 GOV'T. INFO. Q. 439, 446 (2004).
60. Justin Hughes, Copyright and Incomplete Historiographies: Of Piracy, Propertization, and Thomas Jefferson, 79 S. CAL. L. REV. 993, 1046 (2006).
61. 17 U.S.C. § 1201 (2006).
62. Uruguay Round Agreements Act, Pub. L. No. 103-465 § 514, 108 Stat. 4809, 4976 (1994) (codified at 17 U.S.C. § 104A (2006)).
63. The constitutionality of the restoration provision was tested in Luck's Music Library v. Gonzalez, 407 F.3d 1262 (D.C. Cir. 2007), and the provision was held to be constitutional.
64. But see Golan v. Holder, 611 F. Supp. 2d 1165 (D. Colo. 2009) (holding that the provision was broader than necessary to achieve the government's interest).
65. Eligible countries are basically those countries that are World Trade Organization members that adhere to the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty and its Performances and Phonograms Treaty. 17 U.S.C. § 104A(h)(3) (2006).
66. Id. § 104A(h)(6) (2006).
67. Id. § 104A(d)(2).
68. Id. § 104A(d)(3)(A).
69. Id. § 104A(d)(3).
70. Id. § 104A(h)(4)(C).
71. 537 U.S. 186 (2003).
72. H.R. 2601, 108th Cong. (2003), reintroduced as H.R. 2405, 109th Cong. (2005).
73. See AARON SCHWABACH, INTERNET AND THE LAW 252 (2006).
74. Provisional Comm. on Proposals Related to a WIPO Dev. Agenda, World Intellectual Prop. Org., Proposal by Chile (Feb. 2006), available at http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/mdocs/en/pcda-1/pcda-1-2.doc [hereinafter Chilean Proposal).
75. Id. at 1.
76. Id. at 3.
77. Day 2: Chile's Presentation of Its Proposal, From Geneva, (Feb. 21, 2006), http://fromgeneva.blogspot.com/2006/02/day-2-chiles-presentation-of-its. html.
78. Chilean Proposal, supra note 71, at 3.
79. Union for the Public Domain, http://www.public-domain.org (last visited July 31, 2009). The Union for the Public Domain, formed in 1996, describes itself as a non-profit citizens group whose mission is "to protect and enhance the public domain in matters concerning intellectual property." Union for the Public Domain, About Us, http://www.public-domain.org/?q=node/2 (last visited July 31,2009).
80. This is a frequent question or suggestion of librarians in workshops I have conducted over the years.
81. Folsom v. Marsh, 9 F.Cas. 342 (1841).
82. 17 U.S.C. § 107 (2006).
83. Id.(1)-(4).
84. See e.g., Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 578 (1994);
85. Harper & Rowe Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539, 560 (1985).
86. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. at 577-78.
87. See, e.g., A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004, 1014-17 (9th Cir. 2001);
88. Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d 294, 321-24 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), aff'd sub nom. Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429 (2d Cir. 2001).
89. 17 U.S.C. § 108(2006).
90. See generally American Geophysical Union v. Texaco, Inc., 60 F.3d 913 (2d Cir. 1994) (copying of scientific journal articles for researchers at Texaco was not fair use);
91. Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Servs., Inc., 99 F.3d 1381 (6th Cir. 1996) (including copyrighted materials in student coursepacks was not fair use). The pending litigation between Cambridge and Oxford University Presses and Sage Publications and Georgia State University over the posting of copyrighted material within course management software is extremely important to libraries. See Complaint, Cambridge University Press v. Patton, No. 1:08-CV-1425 (N.D. Ga. Apr. 15,2008), available at http://docs.justia. com/cases/federal/district-courts/georgia/gandce/l:2008cv01425/150651/1.
92. 17 U.S.C. § 108(f)(4) (2006).
93. Id. § 1201(c)(1).
94. 273 F.3d 429 (2d Cir. 2001).
95. Id. at 458.
96. See, e.g., Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913 (2005).
97. See Thanks Me Hearties, ECONOMIST, July 17, 2008, at 74;
98. FUTURESOURCE CONSULTING, CONSUMER HOME PIRACY RESEARCH FINDINGS (July 2008), available at http://www.futuresource-consulting.com/press/2008-07- HomeCopyingWhitePaper.pdf.
99. H.R. 1201, 110th Cong. (2007).
100. Id.
101. Bill Patry served as copyright counsel to the U. S. House of Representatives in the 1990s and as a policy advisor to the Register of Copyrights, and was a member of the Cardozo School of Law faculty. He currently is senior copyright counsel at Google. He has written a seven-volume treatise, Patry on Copyright, and until August 2008 he wrote the Patry Copyright Blog (williampatry.blogspot.com).
102. See K. Matthew Dames, Copycense Conversations: The William Patry Interview, Pt. 1, COPYCENSE: ONLINE J. CODE & CONTENT, Aug. 10, 2007, http://www.copycense.com/2007/04/ copycense-conve.html; End of the Blog, The Patry Copyright Blog (Aug. 1, 2008), http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2008--08-01-archive.html.
103. Fair Use, the Three-Step Test, and the Counter-Reformation, The Patry Copyright Blog (Apr. 2, 2008), http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2008/04/fair- use-three-step-test-and-european.html.
104. Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, supra note 56, art. 9.
105. See, e.g., World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty art. 10(1), Dec. 20, 1996, S. Treaty Doc. No. 105-17, 36 I.L.M. 65, 71 (1997);
106. Council Directive 91/250 art 6(3), Legal Protection of Computer Programs, 1991 O.J. (L122) 42, 45 (EC);
107. Council Directive 96/9 art. 6(3), Legal Protection of Databases 1996 O.J. (L 77) 20, 25 (EU));
108. Council Directive 2001/29 art. 5(5), Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society, 2001 O.J. (L 167) 10,17 (EU).
109. Fair Use, the Three-Step Test, and the Counter-Reformation, supra note 95.