Who owns ideas?
12/02/12 05:19
People have been arguing about who owns and idea for a long time. There are ideas that get shared informally and passed around so frequently that no one knows for sure the idea’s origin. Ideas are often shared intentionally. People want ideas to gain acceptance and to go from concept to reality. But people can also get touchy about their ideas claiming that they should have some exclusive right to their idea.
The concept of intellectual property has evolved over the centuries. As the industrial revolution swept Europe and the Americas, patent laws began to be codified. Early in the eighteenth century copyright laws for printed materials were added. Now there are laws that grant ownership and rights to many ideas and concepts. Music, literature, artistic works, discoveries and inventions can be owned. So, too can specific phrases, titles, symbols and designs.
The laws are designed to protect the creators of ideas and to allow them to gain benefit from their creativity. Disputes arise when the origin of an idea isn’t clear. They also arise when the rights are exchanged. One way to benefit from an idea is to sell that idea to someone else. Control of intellectual rights can also be inherited. This leaves the general society with the question of how far from its origin can an idea be controlled.
Other issues arise with the advance of technology. As the music industry made a transition from distributing music through physical objects such as records and CD’s to distributing music through downloadable computer files there were huge issues about how artists might be compensated for their work. Arguments about paying artists are often obscured by the simple fact that there are others who want to profit from music. The record industry was filled with huge salaries paid to people who were tangentially related to the production of popular music, but who were in no way the creators of that music.
Greedy people will always fight over money when there are sizeable amounts of money.
The question remains. Who should get the money that is exchanged when intellectual property is distributed? Most people can agree that the originator of the idea – the composer, author, artist, etc. – should be fairly compensated. We have disagreements about how much money and control should go to others.
The literary world waited a long time for January, 2012. Well a few avid readers with unique tastes were waiting, at least. The date was the expiration date of the copyrights relating to the works of James Joyce. The Irish novelist and poet died in January of 1941. He is probably best known for the huge work, Ulysses, published in 1922, in which he parallels episodes of Homer’s Odyssey in contrasting literary styles. The book is a masterpiece of creative genius, but it isn’t technically a totally new idea. It wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for Homer’s original writing.
Joyce went on to produce many works that illustrated his creativity and skill as a writer. Dubliners is a collection of short stories. The novels A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man and Finnegans Wake established his reputation as a complex thinker and significant writer.
Less known works by Joyce include a play, poems and letters that have all been published. There is also a little known children’s story, “The Cat and the Devil.”
Rumors of other unpublished works abounded. The copyrights and original materials have been closely guarded. The Zurich James Joyce Foundation maintains a large library of original works and charges handsomely for reproductions of their materials. They also use special watermarked papers in their reproductions that protect the materials from publication.
So it is no surprise that a small press in Dublin has produced a new James Joyce book. It is, however, a surprise that the book is another children’s story. “The Cats of Copenhagen” was written in a letter to Joyce’s grandson in 1936 as a “younger twin sister” to “The Cat and the Devil.” The publication of the story has started another big debate about who owns and who should control the works of the author 70 years after his death.
The folks at the Zurich James Joyce Foundation say that not all of the works of Joyce have passed into public domain, only previously published works. The folks at Ithys Press say that the world has a right to access to all of Joyce’s works and that it is only fair that the book be published.
For fans of Joyce, the argument is mute. The press produced only 200 copies of the book that have skyrocketed in value from about $400 per copy to nearly $1,600 for a copy if you can find one. It hasn’t shown up on Amazon.com yet. Once again the argument isn’t really about which ideas will be made public. It is, rather, an argument about who gets the money associated with the ideas.
Greedy people will always fight over money whenever there is money.
I’m not sure Joyce will be remembered as a children’s author anyway. His ideas are very complex, his characters sometimes very dark and his books not easily accessible for casual readers.
What I was hoping to see published was anything that might shed some light on Joyce’s complex relationship with the Catholic Church. The common viewpoint is that Joyce rejected his Catholic upbringing and lived as an atheist or at least an agnostic for his life, reconciling with the church near his death. However, the tension with the church continued to the end of his life. There was no mass of Christian burial at his death. His widow was once asked why there was no funeral mass and she replied, “I couldn’t do that to him.”
Umberto Eco compared Joyce to the stray bishops of the Middle Ages. They left a discipline, not a cultural heritage or a way of thinking. Joyce’s brother explained his break with the church as Joyce’s spiritual side outgrowing the confines of religious practice.
Much more, however, appears to be only speculation. We may never know the complexities of Joyce’s relationship with the church.
At least, I’ve come to the conclusion that there is little that will be revealed through the publication of previously unpublished words. It makes little difference to me. Given the current market, there is little chance I would be able to afford the books if they are ever published.
I am used to ending my blogs with this tag line:
The concept of intellectual property has evolved over the centuries. As the industrial revolution swept Europe and the Americas, patent laws began to be codified. Early in the eighteenth century copyright laws for printed materials were added. Now there are laws that grant ownership and rights to many ideas and concepts. Music, literature, artistic works, discoveries and inventions can be owned. So, too can specific phrases, titles, symbols and designs.
The laws are designed to protect the creators of ideas and to allow them to gain benefit from their creativity. Disputes arise when the origin of an idea isn’t clear. They also arise when the rights are exchanged. One way to benefit from an idea is to sell that idea to someone else. Control of intellectual rights can also be inherited. This leaves the general society with the question of how far from its origin can an idea be controlled.
Other issues arise with the advance of technology. As the music industry made a transition from distributing music through physical objects such as records and CD’s to distributing music through downloadable computer files there were huge issues about how artists might be compensated for their work. Arguments about paying artists are often obscured by the simple fact that there are others who want to profit from music. The record industry was filled with huge salaries paid to people who were tangentially related to the production of popular music, but who were in no way the creators of that music.
Greedy people will always fight over money when there are sizeable amounts of money.
The question remains. Who should get the money that is exchanged when intellectual property is distributed? Most people can agree that the originator of the idea – the composer, author, artist, etc. – should be fairly compensated. We have disagreements about how much money and control should go to others.
The literary world waited a long time for January, 2012. Well a few avid readers with unique tastes were waiting, at least. The date was the expiration date of the copyrights relating to the works of James Joyce. The Irish novelist and poet died in January of 1941. He is probably best known for the huge work, Ulysses, published in 1922, in which he parallels episodes of Homer’s Odyssey in contrasting literary styles. The book is a masterpiece of creative genius, but it isn’t technically a totally new idea. It wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for Homer’s original writing.
Joyce went on to produce many works that illustrated his creativity and skill as a writer. Dubliners is a collection of short stories. The novels A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man and Finnegans Wake established his reputation as a complex thinker and significant writer.
Less known works by Joyce include a play, poems and letters that have all been published. There is also a little known children’s story, “The Cat and the Devil.”
Rumors of other unpublished works abounded. The copyrights and original materials have been closely guarded. The Zurich James Joyce Foundation maintains a large library of original works and charges handsomely for reproductions of their materials. They also use special watermarked papers in their reproductions that protect the materials from publication.
So it is no surprise that a small press in Dublin has produced a new James Joyce book. It is, however, a surprise that the book is another children’s story. “The Cats of Copenhagen” was written in a letter to Joyce’s grandson in 1936 as a “younger twin sister” to “The Cat and the Devil.” The publication of the story has started another big debate about who owns and who should control the works of the author 70 years after his death.
The folks at the Zurich James Joyce Foundation say that not all of the works of Joyce have passed into public domain, only previously published works. The folks at Ithys Press say that the world has a right to access to all of Joyce’s works and that it is only fair that the book be published.
For fans of Joyce, the argument is mute. The press produced only 200 copies of the book that have skyrocketed in value from about $400 per copy to nearly $1,600 for a copy if you can find one. It hasn’t shown up on Amazon.com yet. Once again the argument isn’t really about which ideas will be made public. It is, rather, an argument about who gets the money associated with the ideas.
Greedy people will always fight over money whenever there is money.
I’m not sure Joyce will be remembered as a children’s author anyway. His ideas are very complex, his characters sometimes very dark and his books not easily accessible for casual readers.
What I was hoping to see published was anything that might shed some light on Joyce’s complex relationship with the Catholic Church. The common viewpoint is that Joyce rejected his Catholic upbringing and lived as an atheist or at least an agnostic for his life, reconciling with the church near his death. However, the tension with the church continued to the end of his life. There was no mass of Christian burial at his death. His widow was once asked why there was no funeral mass and she replied, “I couldn’t do that to him.”
Umberto Eco compared Joyce to the stray bishops of the Middle Ages. They left a discipline, not a cultural heritage or a way of thinking. Joyce’s brother explained his break with the church as Joyce’s spiritual side outgrowing the confines of religious practice.
Much more, however, appears to be only speculation. We may never know the complexities of Joyce’s relationship with the church.
At least, I’ve come to the conclusion that there is little that will be revealed through the publication of previously unpublished words. It makes little difference to me. Given the current market, there is little chance I would be able to afford the books if they are ever published.
I am used to ending my blogs with this tag line: