What is the Point of Copyright History?:Reflections on Copyright at Common law in 1774 by H. Tomás Gómez-Arostegui

Copyright history has long been a subject of intense and contested enquiry. Historical narratives about the early development of copyright were first prominently mobilised in eighteenth century British legal discourse, during the so-called Battle of the Booksellers between Scottish and London publishers. The two landmark copyright decisions of that time – Millar v. Taylor (1769) and Donaldson v. Becket (1774) – continue to provoke debate today. The orthodox reading of Millar and Donaldson presents copyright as a natural proprietary right at common law inherent in authors. Revisionist accounts dispute that traditional analysis. These conflicting perspectives have, once again, become the subject of critical scrutiny with the publication of Copyright at Common Law in 1774 by Prof Tomas Gomez-Arostegui in 2014, in the Connecticut Law Review ((2014) 47 Conn. L. Rev. 1) and as a CREATe Working Paper (No. 2014/16, 3 November 2014).

Taking Prof Gomez-Arostegui’s extraordinary work in this area as a point of departure, Dr Elena Cooper and Professor Ronan Deazley (then both academics at CREATe) organised an event, held at the University of Glasgow on 26th and 27th March 2015, to consider the interplay between copyright history and contemporary copyright policy. Is Donaldson still relevant, and, if so, why? What justificatory goals are served by historical investigation, and what might be learned from the history of the history of copyright? Does the study of copyright history still have any currency within an evidence-based policy context that is increasingly preoccupied with economic impact analysis?

This paper provides a lasting record of these discussions, including an editorial introduction, written comments by each of the panelists and Prof. Gomez-Arostegui and an edited transcript of the Symposium debate.

Nuclear import of HIV-1 integrase is inhibited in vitro by styrylquinoline derivatives

Nuclear import of HIV-1 preintegration complexes (PICs) allows the virus to infect nondividing cells. Integrase (IN), the PIC-associated viral enzyme responsible for the integration of the viral genome into the host cell DNA, displays karyophilic properties and has been proposed to participate to the nuclear import of the PIC. Styrylquinolines (SQs) have been shown to block viral replication at nontoxic concentrations and to inhibit IN 3'-processing activity in vitro by competing with the DNA substrate binding. However, several lines of evidence suggested that SQs could have a postentry, preintegrative antiviral effect in infected cells. To gain new insights on the mechanism of their antiviral activity, SQs were assayed for their ability to affect nuclear import of HIV-1 IN and compared with the effect of a specific strand transfer inhibitor. Using an in vitro transport assay, we have previously shown that IN import is a saturable mechanism, thus showing that a limiting cellular factor is involved in this process. We now demonstrate that SQs specifically and efficiently inhibit in vitro nuclear import of IN without affecting other import pathways, whereas a specific strand transfer inhibitor does not affect IN import. These data suggest that SQs not only inhibit IN-DNA interaction but would also inhibit the interaction between IN and the cellular factor required for its nuclear import.