This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Copyright Doctrines, Abstraction and Court Error

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Dennis Khong (University of Manchester)
Abstract

Copyright protection can be divided into five levels: subject matter, level of abstraction, exceptions, term limit, and restricted acts. Although copyright exceptions, in particular the fair use doctrine, and term limit have been subject to significant economic analyses, studies on protection and the limits of protection of subject matter, and level of abstraction in copyright are still fairly scarce. Furthermore, the dominant model for optimal copyright protection is problematic for it requires a standard-based copyright doctrine to achieve what was postulated. Since copyright doctrines in respect of protection based on the level of abstraction are more rule-based in nature, an alternative explanation is in order. In a recent article titled "Copyright as a Rule of Evidence", Douglas Lichtman (2003) hinted such an approach where evidence plays a role in explaining this set of doctrines. In this paper, we use an abstraction and a probabilistic model to explain copyright doctrines. Copyright doctrines such as the idea-expression dichotomy, the originality requirement, de minimis rule, substantiality requirement, merger doctrine, and the scènes á faire doctrine, have the effect of creating a protection divide. Doctrines such as the causal connection requirement, independent creation defence, and the objective similarity requirement, further create an inference divide. We show that the protection and inference divides are relevant in protecting the literal and non-literal dimensions in a copyrighted work. Furthermore, we find that between the protection divide and the inference divide, there is a region of non-strict liability protection. All these three regions, and the related copyright doctrines, are explained by an evidence theory of minimising the risk of court error in deciding infringement cases.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1157&context=rle
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: Subscription to the journal may be required to access full texts.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Publisher Info
Article provided by Berkeley Electronic Press in its journal Review of Law & Economics.

Volume (Year): 3 (2007)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 5
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:bep:rlecon:3:2007:3:5

Note: oai:bepress.com:rle-1157
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.bepress.com/rle

Order Information:
Web: http://www.bepress.com/subscriptions.html

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords: copyright evidence abstraction court error legal error

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

  1. William D. Nordhaus, 1967. "The Optimal Life of a Patent," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 241, Cowles Foundation, Yale University. [Downloadable!]
  2. Landes, William M & Posner, Richard A, 1989. "An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law," Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(2), pages 325-63, June.
  3. Hans-Bernd Schaefer, . "Rule Based Legal Systems as a Substitute for Human Capital. Should Poor Countries Have a More Rule Based Legal System?," German Working Papers in Law and Economics 2001-1-1026, Berkeley Electronic Press. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  4. Depoorter, Ben & Parisi, Francesco, 2002. "Fair use and copyright protection: a price theory explanation," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 453-473, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Png, I. P. L., 1986. "Optimal subsidies and damages in the presence of judicial error," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 101-105, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS also covers the most complete directory of Economics departments and institutes, EDIRC.

This page was last updated on 2008-11-13.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.