Commentary on the Royal Commission's Report on Copyright (1878)

The first major governmental review of the national, colonial, and international copyright regime. The commentary explores the background to the Royal Commission and in particular the efforts of the Association for the Protection of the Rights of Authors in lobbying for law reform. The commentary also explores the extent to which debates about free trade and monopoly commended the attention of the Commissioners and provided a challenge to the dominant conception of copyright - that is, copyright as a property right. The Report affirmed that copyright should continue to be regarded as a property right, and acknowledged the need for reform and consolidating legislation. Beyond that, however, the Commissioners were in considerable disagreement as to copyright's purpose and proper scope, with few of the Report's major recommendations receiving the unanimous support of the same.

Commentary on International Copyright Act 1886

The Act enabling the British government to become a signatory to the Berne Convention, which Convention came into force on 5 December 1887. The commentary describes the nature and extent of British participation in the three conferences which led to the signing of the Berne Convention, against a backdrop of several unsuccessful attempts to reform and consolidate the British copyright regime, the importance of pursuing meaningful Anglo-American copyright negotiations, and the significance of imperial-colonial copyright relations. The commentary also explores the extent to which the cause of Irish Nationalism, and the case for Home Rule, dominated the political landscape in early 1886, so explaining why the opportunity of adhering to the Berne Convention did not also lead to substantive reform of the domestic copyright regime at this time.

Le droit de distribution électronique : essai sur le droit de distribution des oeuvres en droit d'auteur canadien, américain, anglais et français

"Thèse présentée à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de docteur en droit"

Access to knoledge in Brazil: new research on intellectual property, innovation and development

The present volume is the fruit of a research initiative on Access to Knowledge begun in 2004 by Yochai Benkler, Eddan Katz, and myself. Access to Knowledge is both a social movement and an approach to international and domestic policy. In the present era of globalization, intellectual property and information and communications technology are major determinants of wealth and power. The principle of access to knowledge argues that we best serve both human rights and economic development through policies that make knowledge, knowledge-creating tools, and nowledgeembedded goods as widely available as possible for decentralized innovation and use. Open technological standards, a balanced approach to intellectual property rights, and expansion of an open telecommunications infrastructure enable ordinary people around the world to benefit from the technological advances of the information age and allow them to generate a vibrant, participatory and democratic culture. Law plays a crucial role in securing access to knowledge, determining whether knowledge and knowledge goods are shared widely for the benefit of all, or controlled and monopolized for the benefit of a few.

Commentary on: The Articles of the Pope's Bulle (1518)

One of the earliest examples of works printed by Richard Pynson, the King's Printer between 1508 and 1530, to make reference to the fact that the work in question was printed under the protection of the King. The royal printing privilege provided one of two different models for preventing the unauthorised reproduction of works after publication which prefigured the introduction of statutory copyright in the early eighteenth century.The commentary describes the early attitudes of the monarchy towards the regulation of the printing trade within England, and the exercise of the royal prerogative in granting printing privileges not just to the royal printer, but to other favoured subjects both in relation to individual works as well as to entire classes of work (with the latter more often referred to as printing patents).

Commentary on Henrician Proclamation 1538:A Proclamation Prohibiting Unlicensed Printing of Scripture (1538)

Royal Proclamation prohibiting the printing and publishing of ecclesiastical and other books without prior licence, as well as the importation, sale and publication of English language texts printed on the continent. This Proclamation established the precedent for the pre-publication licensing of literary works in England.
The commentary describes the background to the Proclamation, in particular the significance of the English Reformation, and Henry VIII's increasing interest in regulating and censuring the press. The commentary suggests that while this early instance of press intervention influenced governmental attitudes to censorship throughout the next 150 years, one of the crucial differences between this and later models of ideological control was that the 1538 Proclamation sought to censure print materials in a manner that was decoupled from the economic ownership and exploitation of such works.

Commentary on early Tudor printing privileges 1553: Totell's Printing Patent (1553)

One of the earliest examples of work printed by Richard Pynson, the King's Printer between 1508 and 1530, to make reference to the fact that the work in question was printed under the protection of the King. The royal printing privilege provided one of two different models for preventing the unauthorised reproduction of works after publication which prefigured the introduction of statutory copyright in the early eighteenth century.
The commentary describes the early attitudes of the monarchy towards the regulation of the printing trade within England, and the exercise of the royal prerogative in granting printing privileges not just to the royal printer, but to other favoured subjects both in relation to individual works as well as to entire classes of work (with the latter more often referred to as printing patents).

Commentary on the Stationers' Royal Charter 1557

Royal Charter providing the Company of Stationers with corporate legal status within the City of London, and conferring on them exclusive control over printing within England. The grant of the Charter ensured that the Company's licensing procedures became the standard by which members of the book trade secured the right to print and publish literary works, giving rise to what is generally referred to as ‘stationers' copyright'.
The grant of the Charter by Mary is often understood as the point at which the monarchy established an effective regulatory institution to control and censure the press, in the guise of the Stationers' Company, in exchange for an absolute monopoly over the production of printed works. In fact, the commentary suggests that censorship of the press throughout the Tudor period remained an essentially ad hoc and reactive phenomenon, and that both Mary and Elizabeth relied, not primarily upon the Company of Stationers, but on the use of statutory instruments and royal proclamations to censure heretical and treasonous texts.

Commentary on the Elizabethan Injunctions 1559

Royal Proclamation setting out the manner in which the Elizabethan Church was to be reformed and governed. Injunction 51 of this Proclamation continued in the tradition of Henry VIII's 1538 Proclamation in providing the legal foundation for a system of pre-publication licensing in Elizabethan England.
The commentary describes how, in accordance with the Injunctions, the licensing and censorship of the press was to be carried out, not by the Stationers' Company, but by the Privy Council and Elizabeth's newly established Ecclesiastical Commission (the High Commission). It also details how Elizabeth also continued to rely upon the sporadic use of statutory measures and royal proclamations to respond to seditious or heretical texts. Moreover, it suggests that, in practice, the extent to which the Elizabethan press was subject to regulatory control was much less draconian than has usually been suggested.

Commentary on early Tudor printing privileges 1559: Day's privilege for The Cosmographical Glass

An early example of a printing privilege granted to protect the printing of an individual work, in this case William Conningham's The Cosmographical Glass. The commentary describes the early attitudes of the monarchy towards the regulation of the printing trade within England, and the exercise of the royal prerogative in granting printing privileges not just to the royal printer, but to other favoured subjects both in relation to individual works as well as to entire classes of work (with the latter more often referred to as printing patents).

Commentary on Star Chamber Decree 1566

A decree prohibiting the publication of any book considered to be contrary to statute, injunction, ordinance and letters patents, as well as banning the importation of such works. This provided the first occasion on which the proprietary interests of the Stationers' Company and the ideological control of the press become explicitly linked.
The commentary describes the background to the Decree and in particular the concern of Elizabeth's High Commission over the influx of Catholic texts from continental Europe. The commentary argues that the Decree is particularly significant in that it formalised, for the first time, the specific link between the interests of the government in regulating and censuring the press and the economic interests of the Stationers' Company. The formal inclusion of the category of ‘letters patents' within the remit of the Decree ensured that works published under a printing privilege now attracted the formal protection of the Star Chamber.

Commentary on Star Chamber Decree 1586

A decree prohibiting the publication of any book contrary to statute, injunction, ordinance and letters patents, as well as any ordinance set down by the Company of Stationers. The formal protection of the Star Chamber was extended not only to books protected under royal printing privileges (see: uk_1566) but to books printed in contravention of the internal regulations of the Stationers' Company itself, further enhancing the significance of ‘stationers' copyright'.
The commentary describes the background to the decree, in particular the religious controversies of the 1570s and 1580s, as well as the dissatisfaction within the general printing trade during this period at the manner in which a number of the printing privileges granted by Elizabeth resulted in the monopolistic control of commercially lucrative works within the hands of a few stationers only. The commentary also details the efforts of the dominant members of the Stationers' Company to influence the substance of the decree and further augment their control over the internal operation of the book trade.

Commentary on the Statute of Monopolies 1624

Legislation restricting the monarch's ability to make monopoly grants in accordance with the royal prerogative, and providing a statutory basis for the patent system. The legislation established the basis upon which patents for "new manufacture[s]" might be granted to "the true and first inventor" of the same in furthering the interests of industry, the economy, and the state. At the same time, privileges concerning printing were left unaffected by the legislation, as were those for the manufacture of saltpetre or gunpowder and for the casting and making of ordnance (canons). In limiting the term of protection for future patents to 14 years while confining existing patents for the same to a period of 21 years, the legislation influenced the choice of the two copyright terms in the Statute of Anne 1710.

Commentary on Star Chamber Decree 1637

A decree of the Star Chamber designed to regulate the printing of all literary works, whether ecclesiastical or secular in nature. The decree further entrenched the significance and validity of ‘stationers' copyright' in requiring that no work be printed without first being entered on the Company of Stationers' Register Book. The decree also provided that any materials printed thereafter were to carry both the name of the printer and the author of the work.
The commentary describes how, by comparison with earlier decrees (see: uk_1566; uk_1586), the 1637 Decree provided a more elaborate system for licensing both ecclesiastical and secular works as well as a more comprehensive set of regulations to govern the operation of the printing trade. As a regulatory measure, it is widely regarded as representing the high point of the Company of Stationers' control and authority over the book trade.

Commentary on the Humble Remonstrance of the Company of Stationers 1643

A petition from the Company of Stationers to Parliament to introduce some form of legislative regulation of the press. The petition is significant in revealing the extent to which the Stationers depended upon the state to support the regulation of the book trade, as well as the nature of the various public and private interest arguments upon which they sought to base their claim. The commentary articulates the various arguments presented by the Stationers within their petition. The benefits of the legal regulation they suggested concerned not only the censorship and suppression of seditious and heretical texts, but also facilitated the advancement of learning and knowledge and the flourishing of the printing industry itself. In addition, the petition presents the figure of the ‘author' as reliant upon the benefit of his work, and that the ‘production of the Brain' was to be regarded as equivalent to any other commodity or chattel.