[Upd-discuss] #2 Copyright Brief History

[Michael Hart]

A BRIEF HISTORY OF COPYRIGHT

There are several examples of small or failed copyright efforts
that preceded the copyright laws that prevail around the world,
but since this is is A Brief History Of Copyright, those aren't
appropriate for such a brief article.  I will merely state that
there were previous copyright efforts, both in England as older
precessors to what comes below, and also in ancient China.

This article will address the following:

1709--1710  The Statute Of Anne
1909  The 1909 US Copyright Act
1976  The 1976 US Copyright Act
1998  The 1998 US Copyright Act
and very briefly
1886  The Berne Convention, and
its variations.


1709-1710  The Statute Of Anne

Our copyright laws basically start with The Statute Of Anne, in
1709-10.  The date is fuzzy because even this historicel event,
as well as those before, was not as clear cut as most histories
would have you believe; it was still in a state of flux, even a
year into its own existence.

This copyright law, as nearly all copyright laws, was largely a
product of the largest members of the publishing industry, laws
written by the publishing industry for the publishing industry.

In this first case, The Statute Of Anne was mostly written by a
series of incarnations of The Stationers' Guild, which is later
known as The Stationers' Company.  The Stationers were scribes,
and had a virtual monopoly over public writing for profit, from
periods lost in history through the Industrial Revolution after
the advent of the Gutenberg Press, when they became printers as
a result of Gutenberg's historic invention.


*Historical Perspectives

Before Gutenberg, books and other documents were a rarity, even
rarer than the ability to read them.  In most villages it was a
common occurance for only one person to be able to read, and it
was thus the person's role to read any posted notices to all of
the neighbors.  Most knowledge in those days was relayed by the
time honored method of "word of mouth," and most of us know the
accuracy level of such by personal demonstration.

In 50-100 years following the adoption of the Gutenberg Press a
world of books were published, more books than had been made in
the entire previous history of the Earth.

Life changed as a result, including a drastic rise in literacy,
and an equally drastic loss of the Stationers' earlier monopoly
over the entire writing and publication processes.

The price of a book before Gutenberg's press was about equal to
the price of the average family farm, and thus a library was an
incredibly expensive proposition.  In fact, many libraries went
so far as to chain the books to the bookshelves to keep them.
[Look up "chained libraries" for further details.]

After the Gutenberg Press books were available even in villages
that were far off the beaten path, at prices they could afford.
[See the movie Yentl for a vivid example of a wagonload of such
books in the village marketplace.]

Thus the previous monopoly of the written word was broken.

*

However, The Stationers' Guild/Company did not take kindly to a
loss of such an historic monopoly they had enjoyed for ages and
made many less successful efforts at writing and lobbying for a
copyright law that would return them to their glory days as the
only purveyors of the written word in Great Britain.

These efforts are recorded for a period of 150 years before The
Statute Of Anne was finally passed in 1709--7110.

Thus the free reign of the Gutenberg Press existed from 1455 to
1560, and then the Stationers started their campaign to control
this new technology by having it made illegal for anyone, other
than The Stationers Company, to own or operate printing presses
in Britain.

The result in 1710 was that all the printing presses in Britain
were outlawed except for those dozen in London that were owned,
operated, and censored, by the Stationers Company.
[This explains the importance of "The Pamphleteers," during the
Amercian revolution against the British, as it was illegal as a
result of The Statute Of Anne, to have anything published on an
unapproved press or than hadn't been approved by the Stationers
Company, one of the most conservative powers of all time.]
[There were also two exceptions for inexpensive student edition
presses at Oxford and Cambridge but those did little or nothing
to change the availabity of books to the new middle classes.]

*

The Statute Of Anne was a reactionary political machination the
Stationers Company created to undo the effect of the technology
introduced by The Gutenberg Press, and to regain their monopoly
over the publishing industry that had been lost to technologies
they didn't control.
[See the movie The Man In The White Suit for a suitable comment
on what happens when a technology is not controlled by previous
monopoloy owners that can no longer be competitive.]
[Think spinning jenny, cotton gin, power looms:  Jacquard looms
that were the predecessors of computer punch cards.]
www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~ped/teachadmin/ histsci/htmlform/lect4.html

The US Copyright Acts of 1909, 1976 and 1998 were similar acts:
reactionary responses by the ultra-conservative publishers from
a point of view designed to stop competition arising from those
new technologies they didn't want to adopt:  but wanted to keep
others from adopting. . .much as the United States steel makers
tried to do in the decades following World War II.
[The US bombed the Japanese and German steel companies, forcing
them to rebuild newer facilities that proved more efficient.  A
quick look shows that the US companies refused to rebuild, thus
sealing their fate in what was rapidly becoming a world market.

Think "Rust Belt."

The difference today is that copyright is being used worldwide,
not just in one country, to stop the more efficent technologies
that are going to replace ye olde networke publishing companies
whether they like it or not.]

Each of the copyright acts was written and lobbied into laws by
the prevailing publishing powers of the day, a trend that is an
absolutely obvious one when viewed over its history:

1709  The Statute Of Anne replies to The Gutenberg Press
1909  US Copyright Act replies to steam and electric presses
1976  US Copyright Act replies to the Xerox machine
1998  US Copyright Act replies to the Internet/Computer Revolution

Each of these examples, even the most current ones, were hidden
from the public view, a terrible example of just how goverments
are manipulated by the major corporate interests.

No one knew these laws were being passed, they didn't appear in
the media because the media have an extremely biased interest--
even to the point of insuring such laws are passed under a huge
smokescreen such as the impeachment of President Clinton.  Yes,
the 1998 US Copyright Act was passed, behind closed doors, with
only a voice vote so there would be no record of who voted how,
during the same 24 hour period as the President's impeachment.
[An unimpeachable reason not to cover it, eh?]
[Even those most interested did not find out for three weeks.]
[The US 1976 US Copyright Act was also very well hidden, and I
presume the 1909 US Copyright Act was, too, since I found zero
about its history.  Please let me know if you do.

*

These kinds of events are also quite obvious for the copyrights
of the European countries not following The Statute of Anne for
their later copyright laws.

The origin of the Berne Convention itself is highly suspect, as
The first Berne Convention was on September 9th 1886, as it was
in conjunction with the founding of what is now called WIPO.

WIPO blatantly advertizes itself as "international organization
devoted to protecting intellectual property," and as one of the
specialized unfunded agencies of the United Nations.


WIPO:  UNFUNDED AGENCY OF THE UNITED NATIONS

This means that right up front WIPO acknowledges that its main
purpose is "protecting intellectual property" rather than the
rights of the masses, and that it is funded by a cartel of the
major members of the worldwide publishing industry. . yet it
hides itself under the flag of the United Nations while it is
writing and promoting laws in nearly every country worldwide
that do nothing but remove more and more from the public domain
and place more and more under copyright, thus destroying free
public access in the process.

Taking from the many and giving to the few.

This has been part of the world copyright system since the
start of the Berne Convention in 1886 following the start
of The United International Bureau for the Protection of
Intellectual Property [BIRPI] only 3 years earlier.  These
and other copyright promoting industries have merged over
the years for form the current version of WIPO, but their
mission has always clearly been the promotion of copyright
and the degradation of the public's rights, including fair
use and the public domain.

In 1960 BIRPI moved from Berne to Geneva to be closer to the United
Nations and was replaced seven years later by the WIPO, which became
a unfunded part of the UN to futher implement its world takover of
all intellectual property rights on December 17, 1974.

[WIPO claims to have about 175 member nations, pretty much a takeover
of the entire world.]

*

It is obvious that none of these organizations or the laws put
into effect by them were ever meant to promote the interest of
the public, but only to increase the publishers' monopolies.

The further you dig, the more obvious it becomes.

*

A short comment on the Stationers' Company efforts previous to
The Statute Of Anne that I found online. . .it didn't contain
the author's name, but I will keep doing more research:


"Technology was the driver of copyright necessity then as it often is
considered to be now. As presses began competing for sales and material,
they sought assistance in protecting the work they put into creating
and selling titles. In 1557, Britain's Queen Mary I answered these
concerns by giving control of all printing and book sales to one guild,
the Stationers' Company. These printers were given exclusive control
of all the works of long-dead writers as well as the exclusive ability
to pursue and print new authors. The guild sought out these living authors
and paid them a one time fee for perpetual control of their works.
In return for this enormous consideration from the Crown
(in practice, this allowed the guild a complete monopoly,
with the ability to charge whatever price they wanted),
the guild helped to censor "seditious and heretical books."
Although this was clearly a cozy arrangement for the printers
(and to a certain extent the Crown), public dissatisfaction
would not allow it to last."