Landes and Posner (1989)

From Copyright EVIDENCE

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Landes and Posner (1989)
Title: An economic analysis of copyright law
Author(s): Landes, W., Posner, R. A.
Year: 1989
Citation: Landes, W .M., & Posner, R. A. (1989). An economic analysis of copyright law. Journal of Legal Studies, 18(2), 325-363.
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by: Akerlof, Hahn and Litan (2002), Andrés (2006a), Arai and Kinukawa (2014), Baker and Cunningham (2006), Breyer (1970), Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (2006), Charles River Associates (2013), Depoorter and Walker (2013), Harbaugh and Khemka (2010), Kretschmer (2012), Landes and Lichtman (2003), Miceli and Adelstein (2006), Montoro-Pons and Cuadrado-García (2006), Mustonen (2005), Oliar, Pattison and Powell (2014), Pollock (2009), Tor and Oliar (2002), Towse (1999), Troll Covery (2005), Waelde and MacQueen (2004), Watt (2009), Yoon (2002), Zhu, Madnick and Siegel (2008)
About the Data
Data Description: The article is based on an equation model the authors propose to develop and illustrate their points. It is a theoretical exercise and there is no collection of data as such.
Data Type:
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • Not stated
Funder(s):
  • Not stated

Abstract

Intellectual property is a natural field for economic analysis of law, and copyright is an important form of intellectual property. Yet while there are good introductios to the economics of copyright laws, and a number of excellent articles on the economics of copying (as opposed to coryright law), no article examines the field of copyright as a whole, discussing the evolution and major doctrines in the law from an economic standpoint. This article, which is in the spirit of our recent articles of trademark law, tries to fill this gap, although the field is so vast, that our analysis cannot be exhaustive. As in most of our work, we are particularly interested in postivive analyisis, and specifically the question to what extent copyright law can be explained as a means for promoting efficient allocation of resources.

Main Results of the Study

  • Fair use, if too broadly interpreted, can sap the incentive to develop innovative market mechanisms that reduce the transaction costs and make economic exchanges between copyright holders and users feasible.* The number of users of copyrighted music makes individual negotiations with copyright holders. This problem is eliminated when ASCAP acquires non-exclusive rights from copyright holders and offers a blanket license to users for an annual fee; this allows users to perform any music in ASCAP's repertory.* Since performance distributions from ASCAP are an important part of composers' incomes, a fair use exception for performane would greatly reduce the pecuniary incentive to compose music.


Policy Implications as Stated By Author

Copyrights should be time-limited to save on tracing costs. They also advance arguments in favour of the present term (the author's lifetime plus 50), which may be considered long and arbitrary by some.


Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Green-tick.png
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Green-tick.png
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Green-tick.png
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets

Sample size: Not stated"Not stated" is not a number.
Level of aggregation: Not stated
Period of material under study: Not stated