Copyright history. Part 5: Moral Rights
Continued.
The first part is the Black Death .
The second part is Bloody Mary .
The third part - Monopoly dies ... and is reborn .
The fourth part - the United States and the library .
By the end of the 19th century, the constantly growing publishing monopoly of copyright left the authors almost no opportunity to receive income from their works. Almost all the money went to publishers and distributors, and not the creators of the works (almost like now).
One Frenchman named Victor Hugo tried to correct this imbalance and change the rules of the game in favor of the authors, by incorporating the French tradition of droit d'auteur (the right of the author) to copyright laws. In addition, he sought to internationalize the monopoly of copyright. Prior to this, the monopoly was limited to state borders. A French writer could sell his monopoly rights to a French publisher, and they operated in France, but not in Germany or the United Kingdom. Hugo wanted to change that.
Strange as it may seem, when in the middle of the 19th century laws were passed all over Europe protecting the free market and competition, the copyright and patent monopolies were forgotten. In patent law, the introduction of a monopoly was motivated by the “prevention of disloyal competition” - a relic of the shop system, when the shop and guild rigidly dictated the conditions and prices; if today someone tries to practice "loyal competition", then it often ends with a mask show and a trial. Copyright monopoly is a relic of the times of the London Guild of Printers.
')
Victor Hugo wanted to balance the enormous rights of publishers by expanding the rights of authors, thereby, unfortunately, further worsening the position of readers (it is important to remember that there are three parties involved in a conflict of interest around copyright - authors, publishers and the public, and, ironically, only the interests of the latter, as we know, are the legitimate basis for copyright).
Victor Hugo did not live to realize his efforts in something real, the Bern Convention was signed in 1886. It said that each country should respect the copyrights of citizens of other countries, and an international organization was established to oversee its observance, which grew and changed, having survived to our days under the name of the World Intellectual Property Organization ( WIPO ). The Convention itself also grew, changed and was twice subjected to "raider attacks" (about this in the following sections).
So, thanks to the Berne Convention, four aspects of the copyright monopoly have been established, between which there are more differences than similarities:
Non-property rights are very different from commercial property monopolies, since they cannot be sold or transferred. They stand apart from the authors' rights to own their work, which were used to justify the restoration of copyright in 1709.
It is remarkable how often these four rights are deliberately mixed to justify the most controversial and harmful monopoly of copying copies of a work. Copyright advocates often hear something like, “Do you really want someone to take over your job and name it as the author?” This argument only applies to the third, quite adequate and non-objectionable aspect of copyright. to protect the first two.
By the way, the United States did not like the concept of non-property rights, and they did not sign the Bern Convention until they decided to use it to put pressure on Toyota Corporation a hundred years later. We will look at this point in more detail in the seventh article of the cycle.
The sixth part: Raider capture record companies .
The first part is the Black Death .
The second part is Bloody Mary .
The third part - Monopoly dies ... and is reborn .
The fourth part - the United States and the library .
By the end of the 19th century, the constantly growing publishing monopoly of copyright left the authors almost no opportunity to receive income from their works. Almost all the money went to publishers and distributors, and not the creators of the works (almost like now).One Frenchman named Victor Hugo tried to correct this imbalance and change the rules of the game in favor of the authors, by incorporating the French tradition of droit d'auteur (the right of the author) to copyright laws. In addition, he sought to internationalize the monopoly of copyright. Prior to this, the monopoly was limited to state borders. A French writer could sell his monopoly rights to a French publisher, and they operated in France, but not in Germany or the United Kingdom. Hugo wanted to change that.
Strange as it may seem, when in the middle of the 19th century laws were passed all over Europe protecting the free market and competition, the copyright and patent monopolies were forgotten. In patent law, the introduction of a monopoly was motivated by the “prevention of disloyal competition” - a relic of the shop system, when the shop and guild rigidly dictated the conditions and prices; if today someone tries to practice "loyal competition", then it often ends with a mask show and a trial. Copyright monopoly is a relic of the times of the London Guild of Printers.
')
Victor Hugo wanted to balance the enormous rights of publishers by expanding the rights of authors, thereby, unfortunately, further worsening the position of readers (it is important to remember that there are three parties involved in a conflict of interest around copyright - authors, publishers and the public, and, ironically, only the interests of the latter, as we know, are the legitimate basis for copyright).
Victor Hugo did not live to realize his efforts in something real, the Bern Convention was signed in 1886. It said that each country should respect the copyrights of citizens of other countries, and an international organization was established to oversee its observance, which grew and changed, having survived to our days under the name of the World Intellectual Property Organization ( WIPO ). The Convention itself also grew, changed and was twice subjected to "raider attacks" (about this in the following sections).
So, thanks to the Berne Convention, four aspects of the copyright monopoly have been established, between which there are more differences than similarities:
- Commercial monopoly on copyright works. This is the original form of copyright given to London booksellers in exchange for obedience to censorship.
- Commercial monopoly on the execution of works. The right holder may demand money for any commercial public performance of his work.
- Non-property right to authorship. The right of the author or artist to be considered the creator of the work. This right protects against plagiarism and fakes.
- The author’s moral right to protection of reputation, which allows him to prohibit any performance of his works, which, in his opinion, distorts them or damages his good name.
Non-property rights are very different from commercial property monopolies, since they cannot be sold or transferred. They stand apart from the authors' rights to own their work, which were used to justify the restoration of copyright in 1709.
It is remarkable how often these four rights are deliberately mixed to justify the most controversial and harmful monopoly of copying copies of a work. Copyright advocates often hear something like, “Do you really want someone to take over your job and name it as the author?” This argument only applies to the third, quite adequate and non-objectionable aspect of copyright. to protect the first two.
By the way, the United States did not like the concept of non-property rights, and they did not sign the Bern Convention until they decided to use it to put pressure on Toyota Corporation a hundred years later. We will look at this point in more detail in the seventh article of the cycle.
The sixth part: Raider capture record companies .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/162227/
All Articles