Seventeen Famous Economists Weigh in on Copyright: The Role of Theory, Empirics, and Network Effects
Seventeen Famous Economists Weigh in on Copyright: The Role of Theory, Empirics, and Network Effects
复制标题
十七位著名经济学家对版权的看法：理论、经验和网络效应的作用
DOI：
10.2139/ssrn.488085
复制
发表时间：
2003
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Stephen E. Margolis
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Liebowitz;Stephen E. Margolis
埃尔德雷德诉阿什克罗夫特案最近在最高法院进行了辩论，该案件试图将《版权期限延长法案》（CTEA，又名桑尼波诺版权法案）认定为违宪。包括5位诺贝尔奖得主在内的17位经济学家组成了一个杰出的小组，代表了经济学领域的广泛观点，他们提交了一份“居里之友”的陈述，支持埃尔德雷德。经济学家谴责CTEA的理由是，在延长期间所获得的收入是如此严重的折扣，以至于它们几乎没有价值，而对老作品的延长保护造成了直接的垄断无谓损失，并增加了创造新衍生作品的成本。我们认为，比本案的细节更重要的是，版权延期所涉及的经济问题的表述。简报没有很好地阐明这些问题。情况也不像埃尔德雷德经济学家所说的那样一边倒。首先，创造性作品的私有制可能会内化有关使用现有作品和创作衍生作品的潜在重要外部性。其次，埃尔德雷德的经济学家在分析中忽视了创造性作品供给的弹性，而仅仅关注作者获得的利益，这导致了对立即带来利益的额外创造力的潜在低估。第三，Eldred经济学家忽视了版权法的某些特征，如合理使用、思想与表达的区别以及模仿豁免，这些特征可以降低版权成本。最后，我们提供的数据反驳了一种普遍的说法，即版权延长到目前为止对创造力几乎没有影响。一小部分具有大部分商业价值的图书在新出版时似乎在与CTEA下扩大的版权期限相一致的时期内保持价值。
The case of Eldred v. Ashcroft, which sought to have the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA, aka Sonny Bono Copyright Act) found unconstitutional, was recently argued before the Supreme Court. A remarkable group of seventeen economists including five Noble laureates, representing a wide spectrum of opinion in economics, submitted an amicus curie brief in support of Eldred. The economists condemned CTEA on the grounds that the revenues earned during the extension are so heavily discounted that they have almost no value, while the extended protection of aged works creates immediate monopoly deadweight losses and increases the costs of creating new derivative works. More important, we believe, than the particulars of this case, is the articulation of the economic issues involved in copyright extension. The articulation of those issues is not well framed in the brief. Nor is the case as one sided as the Eldred economists have claimed. First, private ownership of creative works may internalize potentially important externalities with respect to the use of existing works and the creation of derivative works. Second, the Eldred economists neglect the elasticity of the supply of creative works in their analysis, focusing instead solely on the benefits received by authors, leading to potential underestimation of additional creativity that confers benefits immediately. Third, the Eldred economists neglect certain features of copyright law, such as fair use, the distinction between idea and expression, and the parody exemption, which mitigate the costs of copyright. Finally, we present data that counters a common claim that copyright extension so far out in the future can have little effect on creativity. The small fraction of books that have the majority of commercial value when they are new appear to remain valuable for periods of time that are consistent with the expanded term of copyright under CTEA.