Joseph P. Liu (2003). Copyright Law's Theory of the Consumer

Comments

Liu (2003), "Copyright Law's Theory of the Consumer"

p. 397-581.

Abstract

Copyright law has a rather well-developed theory of the author, but it has no similarly well-developed conception of the consumer. This exploratory Article is an attempt to begin piecing together a coherent image of the copyright consumer. The author argues that copyright law currently conceives of consumers in one of two ways, either as passive consumers of copyrighted works or as active authors in their own right. This binary concept of the consumer, however, is incomplete, as it neglects important and complex consumer interests in autonomy, communication, and creative self-expression. By examining these additional interests, it is possible to begin constructing a richer and more complex image of the copyright consumer. This image, in turn, can help shed light on some of the current debates over the proper shape and scope of copyright law.

• "self-expression" 計出現 26 次。

p. 397. Introduction

p. 401. I. Conceptions of the Consumer

p. 402. A. The Consumer as Passive Consumer

p. 404. B. The Consumer as Author

p. 406. C. The Consumer as Active Consumer

p. 406. C.1. Autonomy

p. 415. C.3. Creative Self-Expression

[Footnote 109. See Rosemary Coombe, Objects of Property and Subjects of Politics: Intellectual Property Laws and Democratic Dialogue, 69 Tex. L. Rev. 1853, 1863–68 (1991) (arguing that intellectual property laws may stifle the optimal cultural conditions for dialogic practice);

Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss, Expressive Genericity: Trademarks as Language in the Pepsi Generation, 65 Notre Dame L. Rev. 397, 405–07 (1990) (suggesting that a shift to more stringent

intellectual property laws implicates free speech interests); cf. Wendy Gordon, A Property

Right in Self Expression: Equality and Individualism in the Natural Law of Intellectual Property,

102 Yale L.J. 1533, 1556–58, 1606–09 (1993) (suggesting that the Lockean model of property

rights does not justify today’s system of excessive intellectual property rights).]

Under this category of mini-authorship, consumers copy and adapt copyrighted works in small ways, in the course of making sense of the works, commenting on such works, associating themselves with such works, and communicating additional ideas.

[making sense of life.]
Again, the copying is literal and the amount of transformation minimal, yet the act evinces some element of the consumer’s own creative self-expression, even if we do not conventionally think of this as sufficient to constitute “authorship.”
Consumers use copyrighted works as vehicles or platforms for their own self-expression. (Liu, 2003, p. 416)
[evince: to reveal the possession of]

p. 420. II. Observations and Implications

p. 431. Conclusion

The conclusion of this Article, however, are quite tentative, and I do not purport to argue that this image of the consumer is the correct or only one. The hope is that, by proposing at least one such image, this Article will encourage more thought and analysis of copyright law's conception of the consumer.