Techdirt: Publishers Getting The Wrong Message Over eBook Piracy http://post.ly/DLp7
sent via Posterous

On Twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewsavikas/status/6021998849

I’m so very disappointed by this news, more because I feel like this is more smoke and mirrors over the same fear that put publishers in a tight spot. Don’t worry about people stealing content: worry about making your content worth buying!

Need to catch up on the case? I think the AP’s article covers it with the least bias I’ve seen. (Prefer tinted glasses in varying shades? Try The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Publisher’s Weekly, The Toronto Star, The San Francisco Chronicle, and Slate. Not to mention the whole publishing world will probably be on tenterhooks until the final appeal is finished.)

Having just finished some basic reading on copyright, I’m glad to hear that U.S. District Judge Deborah Batts is taking her time deciding. If I were her, I’d be dredging up cases and appeals left and right, too, not wanting to be the judge whom the Supreme Court points to as wrong in a summation. In my limited experience with copyright, I can see the following issues playing a central part in the case:

• Authorship and creativity: the prerequisites for originality. Obviously Colting wrote the book, but is “Mr. C” too closely related to Holden Caulfield to have been created (and thus copyrightable) by Colting? Did Colting successfully transform the original material?
• Parody and criticism. Colting maintains that if “Mr. C” is too closely related to Holden Caulfield, it is only because the character is being used as a means of critiquing Salinger.
• Sweat of the brow. I can definitely see the American perception of hard work and its rewards playing a huge role here, at least in public opinion. As U.S. Copyright Law specifies that originality is the foundation of American copyright, the actual process of writing a book doesn’t guarantee an author copyright. It’s why facts can’t be copyrighted and why so many factual compilations (think phone books). But most importantly, it’s why merely creating either character in question won’t guarantee either writer copyright over his work.
• Effects of alleged infringement. I’d certainly like to hear Salinger’s argument about how Colting’s book would harm Salinger’s “investment” in his CitR copyright. Does he think it’ll ruin booksales? When CitR could be the most widely assigned high school book? When it constantly ends up on the banned book lists? When people who once read library copies of CitR realize they need to buy another copy so they can figure out why Colting is so right or wrong in his opinions? Not to mention the fact that
• (Some) Effects of a(nother) Salinger win. Copyright is supposed to encourage authors to write by offering them a financial incentive. So Salinger, who hasn’t published anything since 1965, is taking advantage of the security afforded him by copyright laws. Rather than allowing copyright to police itself, he’s hoarded the rights to his work, thus limiting our cultural exposure to it. Not only would literature suffer the loss of a (purportedly) creative young critic’s work and the continued dearth of modern Salinger interpretations, but the boundaries of copyright precedent would constrict to shut out similar critics and to shut down other derivative (yet original) creative works.
• Effects of a Colting win. Parody will certainly gain momentum, if only in passing. Depending on the acutal measure of Colting’s literary greatness, a Colting win could mean a step down for the writing world or it could reenter an era of heightened wit and educated criticism. This ruling would certainly favor a relaxing of copyright law, though only slightly; it may have more effect on CitR than any other U.S. book for the next decade. If that’s the truth, I hope this book is worth it.

Having not read Colting’s book, I couldn’t really tell you I’d judge in favor of Colting, but I have to say that based on the elements I can judge from where I am now, Salinger either needs to bolster his case a bit or convince everyone that Colting’s work is less important than mud. As facts surface, as news reporters interview Judge Batts and publish court reports, I may return to reevaluate my assertions. For now, I’d like to hear what you think.

Further Reading:

IRFiction Wiki Topic: Copyright

So here’s the deal: I’ll be writing about digital rights management and contract law for electronic publishing as a final project for a directed study at Emerson. It may not be fiction, but it’s closely related to the heart of this site and the philosophy behind it’s creation.

So stay tuned. All non-fiction posts will be clearly labeled and cataloged w/ the appropriate category. If you have any questions or comments, feel free to check in!