Quote:
Originally Posted by Worldwalker
Something to consider, for the people who say "no author would write anything without a monopoly on it" -- or, nowadays, a monopoly for people who were born long after anyone who ever knew him was dead:
Copyright is a rather recent invention.
Books are not.
|
True.*
Consider this, however: the existence of copyright law doesn't preclude the possibility of an author placing their work in the public domain from the moment of its first publication. How many choose to do so?
-----
*There is, however, a strong and direct link between the ease of production and copying of books, and legislation governing their production.
Before the 15th century, books were expensive and time consuming to produce and copy - only the rich could afford them, so there was little need for legislation controlling their production.
The development of the mechanised printing press and moveable type, in the 15th century in Europe, made the production and copying of books faster and easier, and resulted in a significant increase in the number of books and their availability. As printing spread, during the 16th and 17th centuries, European governments imposed significant restraints on who could print books, and which books they could print.
The European "Age of Enlightenment", in the 18th century, saw highly significant changes in the nature and intent of legislation relating to publishing - the focus shifted from controlling who could print books and what could be printed, to a focus, instead, on copyright for authors. The stated aim of the first copyright act, the
Statute of Anne (UK, 1710) was the "encouragement of learned men to compose and write useful books", by assigning to the author the sole right to print and reprint a book for a set time after its initial publication (and to be able to sell that right to someone else).
So... you have to go back further than many might realise to reach a time when books existed but there was no copyright legislation. The perception of a need for such legislation arose in a (historically) relatively short time following the initial introduction of the technology that made the printing and dissemination of books easier, cheaper, and faster than had ever been the case before.
Given the extent to which it's even easier today than it was in the 18th century to create and distribute books, I'd need to ask - what else has changed that would make the need for copyright legislation unnecessary now, compared to then and the 300 years since then?