When the Law Advances Access to Learning: Locke and the Origins of Modern Copyright

Authors

  • John Willinsky Stanford University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5334/kula.8

Keywords:

Intellectual property, scholarly publishing, John Locke, Statute of Anne 1710

Abstract

In light of the challenge and promise currently facing scholarly publishing’s move to digital models of greater openness, this paper offers a point of historical reflection on an earlier era of concern over sustainable access to learned works. It reports on a period of great turmoil in publishing that ran from the end of British book licensing in 1695, which unleashed a great wave of print piracy and sedition, to the legal remedy afforded by the Statute of Anne 1710, which introduced what we now think of as modern copyright law. The paper begins with John Locke’s lobbying of Parliament to end the effrontery of press censorship and monopoly maintained by the three-decade old Licensing Act of 1662. The scholar-friendly legal reforms of this act that Locke proposed in the 1690s were not taken up by Parliament when it allowed the act to expire in 1695. However, six years after Locke’s death in 1704, his and others’ proposed reforms were to find a place in the Statute of Anne 1710. This legislation was the first to vest authors with an exclusive, limited-term right to print copies of their work, while also protecting the access rights of scholars and the public to these and other works. I argue that the history of the statute reveals how the age of copyright began with striking a fine legislative balance between the interests of learning and those of commercial publishing, while also offering further insight into Locke’s influential work on property rights and limits. My hope is that this portrayal of Locke’s relatively effective political intervention as scholar-activist and public defender of learning in relation to the subsequent Statute of Anne might inspire and lend weight to the academic community’s current grappling with the growing commercial dominance of scholarly publishing.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

A Complete Collection of the Lords’ Protests, from the First Upon Record in the Reign of Henry the Third, to the Present Time. 1768. Vol. 1. London.

Archambault, Éric, Didier Amyot, Philippe Deschamps, Aurore Nicol, Françoise Provencher, Lise Rebout, and Guillaume Roberge. 2014. Proportion of Open Access Papers Published in Peer-Reviewed Journals at the European and World Levels—1996–2013. Science-Metrix. http://www.science-metrix.com/en/publications/reports?page=2#/en/publications/reports/proportion-of-open-access-papers-published-in-peer-reviewed-journals-at-the.

Astbury, Raymond. 1978. ‘The Renewal of the Licensing Act in 1693 and its Lapse in 1695.’ The Library s5–33 (4): 296–322. DOI: 10.1093/library/s5-XXXIII.4.296

Bell, Richard. 1977. ‘Legal Deposit in Britain (Part 1).’ Law Librarian 8(1): 5–8.

Bowrey, Kathy, and Natalie Fowell. 2009. ‘Digging Up Fragments and Building IP Franchises.’ Sydney Law Review 31(2): 185–210. http://search.informit.com.au/fullText;dn=20093203;res=AGISPT

Brown, Stephen J, and David Sumner Sibley. The Theory of Public Utility Pricing. Cambridge University Press, 1986. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511666773

Carroll, Michael W. 2009. ‘One Size Does Not Fit All: A Framework for Tailoring Intellectual Property Rights.’ Ohio State Law Journal, 70: 1361–1434.

‘Commons Reasons for Disagreeing to the Clause for Reviving the Printing Act.’ 1695. Journal of the House of Lords 15(1695): 546. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/lords-jrnl/vol15/pp544-558#h3-0010. Archived at: https://perma.cc/W23Y-E3FN.

Cornish, William. 2010. ‘The Statute of Anne 1709–10: Its Historical Setting.’ In: Global Copyright: Three Hundred Years Since the Statute of Anne, from 1709 to Cyberspace, edited by Lionel Bently, Uma Suthersanen, and Paul Torremans, 14–25. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Cranston, Maurice. 1957. John Locke: A Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Deazley, Ronan. 2003. ‘The Myth of Copyright at Common Law.’ Cambridge Law Journal 62(1): 106–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197303006251

Deazley, Ronan. 2004. On the Origin of the Right to Copy: Charting the Movement of Copyright Law in Eighteenth-Century Britain (1695–1775). Oxford: Hart.

Deazley, Ronan. 2008. ‘Commentary on the Statute of Anne 1710.’ In: Primary Sources on Copyright (1450–1900), edited by Lionel Bently and Martin Kretschmer. http://www.copyrighthistory.org/cam/commentary/uk_1710/uk_1710_com_272007105424.html. Archived at: https://perma.cc/V8VY-R5QG.

Deazley, Ronan. 2010. ‘What’s New About the Statute of Anne? Or Six Observations in Search of an Act.’ In: Global Copyright: Three Hundred Years Since the Statute of Anne, from 1709 to Cyberspace, edited by Lionel Bently, Uma Suthersanen, and Paul Torremans, 26–33. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849806428.00010

Deene, Joris. 2010. ‘The Influence of the Statute of Anne on Belgian Copyright Law.’ In Global Copyright: Three Hundred Years Since the Statute of Anne, from 1709 to Cyberspace, edited by Lionel Bently, Uma Suthersanen, and Paul Torremans, 136–43. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849806428.00017

Defoe, Daniel. 1704. An Essay on the Regulation of the Press. London.

Elsevier. 2017. ‘Spotlight on Open Access.’ https://goo.gl/oiVa2d.

Feather, John. 1980. ‘The Book Trade in Politics: The Making of the Copyright Act of 1710.’ Publishing History 8: 19–44.

Jamali, Hamid R, and Majid Nabavi. 2015. ‘Open Access and Sources of Full-Text Articles in Google Scholar in Different Subject Fields.’ Scientometrics 105(3): 1635–1651. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1642-2

Johns, Adrian. 1989. Nature of the Book: Print and Knowledge in the Making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Johns, Adrian. 2009. Piracy: The Intellectual Property Wars from Gutenberg to Gates. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226401201.001.0001

Kemp, Geoff. 2012. ‘The ‘End of Censorship’ and the Politics of Toleration, from Locke to Sacheverell.’ Parliamentary History 31(1): 47–68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-0206.2011.00282.x

Larivière, Vincent, Stefanie Haustein, and Philippe Mongeon. 2015. ‘The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era.’ PLoS One 10.6: e0127502. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127502.

Locke, John. (1690) 1988. Two Treatises of Government, edited by Peter Laslett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810268

Locke, John. (1694–95) 1997. ‘Liberty of the Press (1694–5).’ In: Political Essays, edited by Mark Goldie, 329–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Locke, John. 1976–89. The Correspondence of John Locke. Edited by Esmond Samuel De Beer. 8 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lowenstein, Joseph. 2002. The Author’s Due: Printing and the Prehistory of Copyright. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226490410.001.0001

Macaulay, Thomas Babington. 1856. The History of England, from the Accession of James II. Vol. 4. Philadelphia: Butler.

Matthews, Duncan. 2003. Globalising Intellectual Property Rights: The TRIPS Agreement. London: Routledge.

Merges, Robert P. 2011. Justifying Intellectual Property. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674061125

Milton, John. (1644) 1958 ‘Areopagitica.’ In: Prose Writings, edited by K. M. Burton, 145–85. London: Dent.

Partridge, R. C. Barrington. 1938. The History of the Legal Deposit of Books Throughout the British Empire: A Thesis Approved for the Honours Diploma of the Library Association. London: Library Association.

Philip, Ian. 1983. The Bodleian Library in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983.

Pollard, Alfred W. 1916. ‘The Regulation of the Book Trade in the Sixteenth Century.’ Library 7(25): 22–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/library/s3-VII.25.18

Ransom, Harry. 1956. The First Copyright Statute: An Essay on an ‘Act for the Encouragement of Learning,’ 1710. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

‘Reasons Humbly Offer’d for the Bill for the Encouragement of Learning, London (1706).’ In: Primary Sources on Copyright (1450–1900), edited by Lionel Bently and Martin Kretschmer. http://www.copyrighthistory.org/record/uk_1706. Archived at: https://perma.cc/B6P2-NL7V.

Rose, Mark. 1993. Authors and Owners: The Invention of Copyright. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Rose, Mark. 2003. ‘Nine-tenths of the Law: The English Copyright Debates and the Rhetoric of the Public Domain.’ Law and Contemporary Problems 66(1): 75–87. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20059172.

Schiermeier, Quirin. 2017. ‘US court grants Elsevier millions in damages from Sci-Hub.’ Nature, June 22 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2017.22196

‘The Statute of Anne, April 10, 1710.’ 2008. The Avalon Project: Documents in Law, History and Diplomacy. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/anne_1710.asp. Archived at: https://perma.cc/4ZGH-J6HS.

Yu, Peter K. 2017. ‘Customizing Fair Use Transplants (October 13, 2017).’ Unpublished Texas A&M University School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 17–78. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3052158.

West, Jevin D., Theodore Bergstrom, and Carl T. Bergstrom. 2014. ‘Cost effectiveness of open access publications.’ Economic Inquiry 52(4): 1315–1321. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12117

Downloads

Published

2017-11-30

How to Cite

Willinsky, John. 2017. “When the Law Advances Access to Learning: Locke and the Origins of Modern Copyright”. KULA: Knowledge Creation, Dissemination, and Preservation Studies 1 (1):2. https://doi.org/10.5334/kula.8.

Issue

Section

Research Articles

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.