In ‘Propertizing European Copyright’,
Caterina Sganga considers a question well-known to intellectual property
lawyers: is copyright a property right? Whilst the question is not novel, Sganga’s
answer should pique your interest. Briefly put, the author argues that there is
nothing to fear, but much to gain, by framing copyright squarely within the
logic of property. Doing so would replace the current patchwork of copyright
rationales and justifications currently existing at the European level with property
theory as the theoretical foundation for its existence and enforcement.
The author identifies the current
foundational patchwork of copyright as one of the main causes crippling its
implementation, not least in the place
of copyright exceptions, as expressed in the jurisprudence of the Court of
Justice of the European Union. Where many would see the assertion of copyright
as a property right as the kiss of death for users’ interests and the public
domain, Sganga demonstrates that giving copyright a single legal identity, such
as property, may be the only way to obtain a balanced framework capable of
protecting both authors’ and users’ interests.
For instance, a property theory
of copyright would allow national and EU courts to introduce into copyright the
notion of ‘abandonment’ – allowing unexploited copyright works to enter the
public domain and be freely reused by others (p. 241-244). The author argues
that the non-use of protected content already triggers similar consequences
under trade mark and patent law – so why not copyright? The author rightly
points out that copyright authors are less likely to be market competitors
compared with the vast majority of patent-holders and trade mark owners. As
such, a large number of copyright holders would be unlikely to receive legal
assistance in the management of their intellectual property rights, making this
group of right-holders particularly vulnerable to abandonment for non-use.
|
More property theory for copyright? ...and now, an abandonment theory? |
This may create an undesired imbalance in
protection between copyrights owned by corporations and those owned by
individuals. For this reason, the theory of abandonment could not be brought in
copyright via mere judicial interpretation. Rather, it would require a reform
of EU copyright law that would put in place the appropriate safeguards to
ensure that if the non-use of copyright works was to trigger the loss of
economic rights, authors will have
access to appropriate support and recourse to challenge this process.
|
A bit of property never hurts if you stay on top of it... |
The book juxtaposes the
historical evolution of the concepts of property and copyright across four
national jurisdictions: the UK, France, Germany and Italy (see Chapter 1, 2 and
4). Sganga shows the extent to which the uneasy theoretical framework of
European copyright law is attributable to the differences in conceptualizing copyright and property across these countries (Chapter 3 and 4). Propertizing European Copyright’ does
not cover the question of Brexit, most likely due to the timing of the event.
It will be interesting to see whether the narrative on European copyright
changes post-Brexit, and if the underlying rationale of copyright evolves as
the main common-law jurisdiction of the EU pulls out of the copyright harmonization project the EU has been engaged
in since the 1990s. Will Brexit facilitate copyright harmonization within the
remaining countries and encourage a stronger property-based rationale under
European copyright law?
The book will be useful to academics
in intellectual property law interested in the foundational theories of
copyright. Chapter 1 and 2 will be particularly helpful to students as they
provide a clear and concise summary of the justifications for copyright, a
topic that is the starting point of most curricula on copyright.
Book reviewed: Propertizing European Copyright – History,
Challenges and Opportunities by Catarina Sganga (2018) Edward Elgar. 336 pp.
Hardback Price: £90.00 Web: £81.00. ISBN: 978 1 78643 040 3. An electronic version of the book is also available from £21.60, see e-books.com or Google Play Books. For more
information, click here.
"The author argues that the non-use of protected content already triggers similar consequences under trade mark and patent law"
ReplyDeleteWhich patent law is that? Here in the US, our patent law provides that a patent right holder can do absolutely nothing at all with her patent right. This long established principle is reflected in the 1908 Paper Bag case.