A Natural Right to Copy

25 Pages Posted: 20 Aug 2019 Last revised: 7 Oct 2019

Date Written: August 17, 2019

Abstract

In this symposium, we gather to celebrate the work of Wendy Gordon. In this essay, I revisit her article, A Property Right in Self-Expression: Equality and Individualism in the Natural Law of Intellectual Property. In the article, Professor Gordon first used the "no-harm" principle of John Locke to justify copyright as natural right and then used his “enough-and-as-good” proviso to limit that right. Her second step turned natural rights approaches to copyright on its head. Through it, she showed that even if we accept copyright as natural right, that acceptance does not necessarily lead to a copyright of undue breadth or perpetual duration. Rather, even a natural rights framework leads to a copyright regime shorter and narrower than we presently have.

While I agree that copyright should be shorter and narrower, I worry that Professor Gordon conceded too much in her first step. Neither Locke’s reasoning nor Professor Gordon’s reading of it can justify a right to prohibit copying as a matter of natural law. It is not the right to prohibit copying to which we have a natural entitlement. It is the right to copy.

Keywords: copyright, natural rights, Locke, efficiency

Suggested Citation

Lunney, Glynn S., A Natural Right to Copy (August 17, 2019). Boston University Law Review, Forthcoming; Texas A&M University School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 19-42. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3438625 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3438625

Glynn S. Lunney (Contact Author)

Texas A&M University School of Law ( email )

1515 Commerce St.
Fort Worth, TX 76102
United States
504-865-5987 (Phone)

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
47
Abstract Views
292
PlumX Metrics