Copyright Definitions and Introduction - Part 1 of the Copyright Saga

Please also read Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5 of the Copyright Saga.

Over on the Nerdfighter Government Forums, I created a stir when I claimed that copyright was detrimental to our country and that I thought the copyright clause should be removed from our constitution. You can find that comment here:
Penal System Thread

First of all, I want to clarify that my goal is not to justify taking things that aren't mine, such as downloading songs and video games without paying for them. I comply with the appropriate laws, with possible exceptions in the DMCA.

My motives here are:
* Removing one of the most common sources of regulatory capture
* Restoring natural rights
* Increasing competition
* Increasing collaboration
* Reducing costs on goods
* Reducing the complexity of laws
* Reducing the number of lawsuits and litigation

First of all, what is copyright not?
* Removing copyright would still keep plagiarism, so people could not take credit for your work.
* Removing copyright would still allow you to modify and distribute your own works freely.
* Keeping copyright would still allow other people to use copy, modify, and use copyrighted works under the guidelines of Fair Use (at least in the USA?).
* Copyright is not a patent, which is the exclusive right to implement a design.
* Copyright is not a trademark, which is the exclusive right to a character or logo.

The definition of copyright from Merriam - Webster is:
---------------------------
* Main Entry: 1copy·right
* Pronunciation: \-ˌrīt\
* Function: noun
* Date: 1735

: the exclusive legal right to reproduce, publish, sell, or distribute the matter and form of something (as a literary, musical, or artistic work)
----------------------------
(Is their definition copyrighted? Uh, oh)

I will start by presenting a strict definition of copyright to make it easier to discuss:
"Copyright is an exclusive right for a limited time to copy or produce a created work for a specific commercial purpose."

Making copyright an exclusive right means that it takes natural rights from other people in order to give another right to the right holder. Normally, in libertarian ideals, this is a big problem. The founding fathers justified this in the copyright clause of the US Constitution:
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
We'll discuss this further later.

Defining a copyright as operating over a limited time means that the exclusive right does not last forever. Most nations do place time restrictions on copyright, so this is pretty common. The US has extended the term on copyright over the years.

The part of the definition, "copy or produce" is the right that is being taken away from other citizens. This right would normally be covered under the First Amendment of the US Constitution, the right to Free Speech:

The created work part of my definition is intended to be extremely narrow relative to existing implementations of copyright. My definition here refers to exact copies, meaning that derivative works are not covered. Someone could change just one part and the new work would not be protected under my definition. I am intentionally keeping my definition this narrow so I can discuss the alternatives later.

The specific purpose part of my definition is part of the US definition of fair use which gives copyright exceptions under these criteria:
1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Under point 1, distributing even an exact copy of a work under a different purpose might be considered fair use, as in the case of the magazine posters in that article.

The commercial purpose part of my definition means that people can't remove the copyright owner's ability to make money by making money off of the work themselves. This part of my definition is also based on fair use exceptions, especially points 1 and 4. This last part of the definition is very ambiguous and will need special focus in later posts.

In the next post, I'll try and start my criticism.

Tags: commercial, commons, copyright, creative, disruption, fair, use