저작자보호의 관점에서 본 앤 여왕 저작권법(Statute of Anne)
Statute of Anne in the View of Author Protection
1
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Statute of Anne has been recognized the first copyright act, and a model statute on the right of author in terms of legislative history. While the Statute of Anne(hereinafter ‘the Statute’) has been regarded as the provisions which to keep the right of author, it was a kind of anti-trust law to regulate the monopolistic profit of the bookseller cartel, otherwise it was a law for the educational improvement of people according to the name of ‘Act for Encouragement of Learning’. Based on legal reasoning, the fact that the Statute was the first copyright act is controversial. There wasn’t any term of ‘copyright’, and also there was no provision for creativity, and for copyrightable subject-matter. The Statute was not for author, but for publisher(or copyright holder) and bookseller. The right that was the exclusive property of author’s manuscript has been transferred to them. Even established the statutory right for author by the Statute, it was ambiguous to keep the legal status of author. Until Donaldson v. Beckett(1774) which has ceased from the battle between the statutory right from the Statute and the perpetual right of common law, it was complicate to find the real meaning of copyright act in England. It meant there was not any author’s right for creativity(plus authorship). To say simple, the concept of Romantic authorship has played an important role in laying the foundation of modern copyright laws after second half of 19th century. In light of the author-centered framework of modern copyright act, the existing Korean Copyright Act has some troublesome issues, which are the disregard of author’s right and not-fostering creativity. Even over three hundred difference between the Statute and the existing Copyright Act, it is not surprising matter that there are some problems with respect to author’s legal status. That is to say, a metaphor is ‘the death of author and the rise of irrational business’.
Abstract
Statute of Anne has been recognized the first copyright act, and a model statute on the right of author in terms of legislative history. While the Statute of Anne(hereinafter ‘the Statute’) has been regarded as the provisions which to keep the right of author, it was a kind of anti-trust law to regulate the monopolistic profit of the bookseller cartel, otherwise it was a law for the educational improvement of people according to the name of ‘Act for Encouragement of Learning’. Based on legal reasoning, the fact that the Statute was the first copyright act is controversial. There wasn’t any term of ‘copyright’, and also there was no provision for creativity, and for copyrightable subject-matter. The Statute was not for author, but for publisher(or copyright holder) and bookseller. The right that was the exclusive property of author’s manuscript has been transferred to them. Even established the statutory right for author by the Statute, it was ambiguous to keep the legal status of author. Until Donaldson v. Beckett(1774) which has ceased from the battle between the statutory right from the Statute and the perpetual right of common law, it was complicate to find the real meaning of copyright act in England. It meant there was not any author’s right for creativity(plus authorship). To say simple, the concept of Romantic authorship has played an important role in laying the foundation of modern copyright laws after second half of 19th century. In light of the author-centered framework of modern copyright act, the existing Korean Copyright Act has some troublesome issues, which are the disregard of author’s right and not-fostering creativity. Even over three hundred difference between the Statute and the existing Copyright Act, it is not surprising matter that there are some problems with respect to author’s legal status. That is to say, a metaphor is ‘the death of author and the rise of irrational business’.
참고문헌 (42)
- 김윤명, "퍼블릭 도메인과 저작권법" (2009), 커뮤니케이션북스
- 남형두, "저작권의 역사와 철학", 산업재산권, (26), pp.245~306 (2008), 한국지식재산학회
- 배대헌, "저작권의 발명과 발전" (2013), 한국학술정보(주)
- 배대헌, "역사적 관점에서 본 기술변화와 저작권 관계", 창작과 권리, (64), pp.156~194 (2011), 세창출판사
- 배대헌, "‘기술로 문화산업을 이끄는’ 저작권법에 대한 논의", 산업재산권, (25), pp.251~289 (2008), 한국지식재산학회
- 민경재, "서양에서의 저작권법 성립 역사에 관한 연구", 법학논총, 33(2), pp.285~317 (2013), 법학연구소
- 최상필, "우리 저작권법 체계상 저작자와 저작권의 귀속문제", 재산법연구, 24(1), pp.347~375 (2007), 한국재산법학회
- 한지영, "지적재산의 철학에 관한 연구-로크의 노동이론을 중심으로-", 산업재산권, (20), pp.1~28 (2006), 한국지식재산학회
- Howard B. Abrams, "The Historic Foundation of American Copyright Law: Exploding in the Myth of Common Law Copyright", Wayne L. Rev, 29, pp.1119~ (1983)
- Isabella Alexander, "The Genius and the Labourer: Authorship in Eighteenth – and Nineteenth-century Copyright Law" (2010), Cambridge Univ. Press
- James Boyle, "The Public Domain" (2008), Yale Univ. Press
- Cohen, Loren, "Okediji and O’Rourke, Copyright in a Global Information Economy" (2002), Aspen Law & Business
- William Cornish, "Global Copyright: Three Hundred Years since the Statute of Anne, from 1709 to Cyberspace" (2010), Edward Elgar
- Guiseppina D’Agostino, "Copyright, Contracts, Creators" (2010), Edward Elgar
- "Commentary on the Statute of Anne 1710"[URL]
- "An Essay on the Regulation of the Press"[URL]
- John Feather, "Privilege and Property: Essays on the History of Copyright, eds Deazley" (2010), Open Book Publisher
- NN Feltes, "Construction of Authorship" (1994), Duke Univ. Press
- Christophe Geiger, "Global Copyright: Three Hundred Years since the Statute of Anne, from 1709 to Cyberspace" (2010), Edward Elgar
- J. Greene, "The Trouble with Ownership: Literary Property and Authorial Liability in English, 1660-1730" (2005), Univ. of Penn. Press
- Nick Groom, "Unoriginal Genius: Plagiarism and the Construction of ‘Romantic’ Authorship" (2010), Cambridge Univ. Press
- D. Halbert, "Intellectual Property in the Information Age: The Politics of Expanding Ownership Right" (1999), Quorum Books
- Peter Jaszi, "Toward A Theory of Copyright: The Metamorphoses of Authorship", Duke L.J, 1991, pp.455~
- Adrian Johns, "Piracy: The Intellectual Property Wars from Gutenberg to Gates" (2009), Univ. of Chicago Press
- Neustetel, L. Joseph, "Der Büchernachdruck nach Römischem Recht betrachtet" (1824), Groos
- B. Zorina Khan, "The Democratization of Invention: Patents and Copyrights in American Economic Development, 1790-1920" (2005), Cambridge Univ. Press
- Dennis W.K. Khong, "Historical Law and Economics of the First Copyright Act", Erasmus Law Economics Review, 2(1) (2006)
- J. M. Lely, "Copyright Law Reform: An Exposition of Lord Monkswell’s Copyright Bill" (1891), Eyre and Spottiswoode
- Robert Macfarlane, "Original Copy: Plagiarism and Originality in 19C Literature" (2007), Oxford Univ. Press
- Alastair J. Mann, "Privilege and Property: Essays on the History of Copyright" (2010), Open Book Publisher
- Tilar J. Mazzeo, "Plagiarism and Literary Property in the Romantic Period" (2007), Univ. of Penn. Press
- Lyman R. Patterson, "Copyright in Historical Perspective" (1968), Vanderbilt Univ. Press
- Karl-Nikolaus Peifer, "Privilege and Property: Essays on the History of Copyright" (2010), Open Book Publisher
- Gunnar Petri, "Global Copyright: Three Hundred Years since the Statute of Anne, from 1709 to Cyberspace" (2010), Edward Elgar
- Mark Rose, "Authors and Owners" (1993), Harvard University Press
- Mark Rose, "Global Copyright: Three Hundred Years since the Statute of Anne, from 1709 to Cyberspace" (2010), Edward Elgar
- Mark Rose, "Of Authors and Origins" (1994), Oxford Univ. Press
- Margaret Russett, "Fictions and Fakes: Forging Romantic Authenticity, 1760-1845" (2006), Cambridge Univ. Press
- Roger E. Schechter, "Principles of Copyright Law" (2010), West Publishing
- Brad Sherman, "The Making of Modern Intellectual Property Law" (1999), Cambridge Univ. Press
- Martha Woodmansee, "The Construction of Authorship: Textual Appropriation in Law and Literature" (1994), Duke Univ. Press
- Martha Woodmansee, "The Author, Art, and the Market: Rereading the History of Aesthetics" (1994), Columbia Univ. Press