Oliar and Matich (2014)
|Oliar and Matich (2014)|
|Title:||Copyright Preregistration:Evidence and Lessons from the First Seven Years, 2005-2012|
|Author(s):||Oliar, D., Matich, N|
|Citation:||Oliar, D., & Matich, N. (2014). Copyright Preregistration: Evidence and Lessons from the First Seven Years, 2005-2012.|
|Key Related Studies:|
|Linked by:||Oliar, Pattison and Powell (2014)|
|About the Data|
|Data Description:||We retrieved the preregistrations of all 6,086 works dated from the launch of the system in November of 2005 through December 31, 2012. Of these, 2,525 were later registered, and we retrieved all of these subsequent registrations as well.|
|Data Type:||Secondary data|
|Secondary Data Sources:|
|Data Collection Methods:|
|Data Analysis Methods:|
|Cross Country Study?:||No|
|Government or policy study?:||No|
|Time Period(s) of Collection:||
In this Article, we study how the preregistration system was formed and then used in its first years. The analysis of the system’s use is informed, first, by a quantitative analysis of preregistration records. We retrieved the preregistrations of all 6,086 works dated from the launch of the system in November of 2005 through December 31, 2012. Of these, 2,525 were later registered, and we retrieved all of these subsequent registrations as well. We report various preregistration and subsequent registration statistics broken down by year, category of work, and type of preregistrant, and discuss several notable patterns in the data. Our analysis is also informed by interviews with lawyers and preregistrants, which we quote from throughout the Article, conducted in order to get insiders’ views of the system and to augment and help make sense of the quantitative data.
Main Results of the Study
The Article recommends that: * the duration of preregistrations should be limited; * preregistration (and other copyright) fees should vary with entity size. It offers lessons for formalities and copyright reform: * Digital-age formalities may not give rise to the distributional concerns that characterized old formalities; * newly minted formalities may limit, rather than expand, access to expressive works; * the rates of subsequent registration of preregistered works vary across categories and can inform copyright lawmaking; * the Copyright Office’s views may be affected by its institutional interest.The study recommended the desirability of limiting the duration of preregistrations and of varying preregistrations fees according to entity size. More generally, the study suggested that formalities may not necessarily entail an adverse distributive effect, nor a necessary beneficial effect on access to expressive works. Preregistration data provide valuable information concerning works’ effective commercial life that can help policymaking on copyright duration. The Copyright Office was suggested to have had an agency role in the creation of the preregistration system.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
Our findings could also be used to reform copyright filing fees and better understand their effect. Landes and Posner’s “most interesting result” in their regression analysis was that registrations are highly sensitive to increase in fees.They thus suspect that many works have negligible expected value. Our data and interviews further suggest that the fee elasticity of preregistration likely changes with the type of preregistrant.
Coverage of Study
|Level of aggregation:||Preregistrations|
|Period of material under study:||2005-2012|