Note: The following text was prepared for the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), which is the research institution for Congress (parallel to the Library of Congress in its function). At the time, I was serving on the advisory board for a study of the effects of home taping on copyright. Some of the remarks deal with analog processes that are now essentially moot.

In Principle . . .

Legal Principles

Goals of the copyright law.

Distribution of information and cultural artifacts.
It is axiomatic that the broad distribution of and general public access to information and cultural artifacts (i.e. intellectual property) is desirable. In fact, a strong case can be made supporting the notion that such distribution and access is directly tied to gross national product, quality of life, and social progress. If this is so, then the public interest in the distribution of and public access to intellectual property is overwhelming. The act of copyrighting and/or patenting is in fact the act of public disclosure, leading to distribution and access. It further follows that the individual desiring to restrict distribution and access to his/her intellectual property should do so not by force of copyright law designed to serve that public interest but rather by refusal to publish such property and/or strictly limit its distribution.

Compensation and protection for the creators and owners of intellectual property.
It is axiomatic that creators of intellectual property desire compensation for their work. In fact, creation of intellectual property that is not compensated will be stunted. Survival dictates that compensated work will displace uncompensated work.

Therefore, it is strongly in the public interest that creators of intellectual works (a) be fairly compensated for their works so that the creation of such work is not displaced by compensated non-creative work, and (b) distribute and share their works as broadly as possible.

Both conditions are necessary in order for the public interest in intellectual property to be served. Any legislation should therefore support both adequate compensation for and broad dissemination of such intellectual property.

It should also be noted that the recent explosion of low-cost copying technologies must be viewed as being overwhelmingly in the public interest. This explosion has dramatically enhanced the distribution of and public access to intellectual property.