Ghafele, Roya and Gibert, Benjamin (2012): The economic value of fair use in copyright law: counterfactual impact analysis of fair use policy on private copying technology and copyright markets in Singapore.
Download (1MB) | Preview
The counterfactual impact analysis of fair use amendments in Singapore undertaken here demonstrates that flexible fair use policy positively influences growth rates in private copying technology industries. In 2010, five years after the policy intervention, Singapore’s fair use amendments are correlated with a 3.33% increase in value-added (as % of GDP) for private copying technology industries. Prior to the amendment of fair use policies, private copying technology industries experienced - 1.97% average annual growth. After the changes were introduced, the same industries enjoyed a 10.18% average annual growth rate. This resulted in a total increase of € 2.27 billion in value-added for private copying technology industries in that period. The results show that, prior to fair use amendments, the private copying industries in Singapore were in recession. After fair use amendments, this group experienced a rapid increase in growth rates and continued to exhibit strong growth over the five year period.
Crucially, the control group, a set of technology manufacturers/services, was not significantly affected by the fair use amendments in Singapore. The counterfactual impact of fair use policies on the control group, five years after the amendment, is shown to be correlated with a 0.01% increase in value-added (as % of GDP). Despite experiencing fluctuating growth rates, the control group exhibited steady, albeit small, recession relative to the entire economy both before and after the fair use amendments. Though the year-on-year growth rates of the control group fluctuated significantly, the period-averages were closer in magnitude than the other two groups (3.89% pre-amendment growth and -0.22% post-amendment growth). This suggests that the control group was not significantly affected by the fair use amendments. This is a positive finding that enables us to better isolate the impact of fair use on the two industrial groups of interest.
The counterfactual impact analysis results in Singapore indicate that the growth of private copying technologies has had a negligible impact on copyright industry revenue. For 2010, fair use policy was correlated with a -0.23% reduction in value-added (as % of GDP) for copyright industries. The copyright group enjoyed an average growth rate of 14.16% before the amendments were introduced (a total increase of over € 274 million in value-added). This slowed to 6.68% for the period after the amendments were introduced and resulted in a total increase of over € 158 million in value-added. There was no significant change in growth rates for the copyright group before and after fair use amendments when measured in terms of real economic growth (value added as % of GDP). While growth certainly slowed down in absolute terms, the industry group nevertheless continued to grow after the intervention. Moreover, the magnitude of the change was minimal in comparison to the private copying group.
The results indicate that the growth rate of copyright industries leveled out after the fair use policy intervention and consequently that the value-added (as % of GDP) of the copyright industry group remained relatively constant over the entire period. While copyright industry growth rates slowed to a limited extent, copyright markets did not experience a significant negative impact. Moreover, this impact was offset by substantially higher growth rates in private copying technology industries. We suggest fair use amendments in Singapore did not negatively affect the copyright industries significantly because private copying technologies, which experienced high growth as an industry group after the fair use amendments, increase the value of copyrighted works to consumers. While one might expect a rise in private copying technology industries to result in a significant recession for the copyright industries, this has not been the case in Singapore since the introduction of more flexible fair use policy in 2005.
The counterfactual impact analysis results for the Singapore case study show that fair use policy is correlated with higher growth rates in private copying technology industries while having a very limited impact on copyright industries.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||The economic value of fair use in copyright law: counterfactual impact analysis of fair use policy on private copying technology and copyright markets in Singapore|
|Keywords:||Fair Use amendments, Singapore, Private Copying Technologies, Value Added in technology manufacturers and services|
|Subjects:||O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O38 - Government Policy
O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O34 - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O31 - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
|Depositing User:||Roya Ghafele|
|Date Deposited:||02. Oct 2012 19:33|
|Last Modified:||22. Aug 2015 13:30|
Africa, M. (2000). The Misuse of Licensing Evidence in Fair Use Analysis: New Technologies, New Markets, and the Courts. California Law Review, 88(4), 1145–1183.
Barron, A. (2006). Copyright. Theory, Culture & Society, 23, 278–282. doi:10.1177/026327640602300237
Bell, T. W. (1997). Fair Use vs. Fared Use: The Impact of Automated Rights Management on Copyright’s Fair Use Doctrine. North Carolina Law, 76, 557.
Benkler, Y. (1999). Free as the air to common use: First Amendment constraints on enclosure of the public domain. NyuL Rev., 74, 354.
Besen, S. M. (1986). Private copying, reproduction costs, and the supply of intellectual property. Information Economics and Policy, 2(1), 5–22. doi:10.1016/0167-6245(86)90012-0
Besen, S. M., & Kirby, S. N. (1989). Private Copying, Appropriability, and Optimal Copying Royalties. Journal of Law and Economics, 32(2), 255–280.
Bronmo, O. (1997). Copyright Legislation, Fair Use and the Efficient Dissemination of Scientific Knowledge. IFLA Journal, 23, 290–294. doi:10.1177/034003529702300412
Burk, D., & Cohen, J. (2007). Fair use infrastructure for copyright management systems.
Carroll, M. W. (2007). Fixing fair use. North Carolina Law Review, 85, 1087–1154.
Cenite, M., Wanzheng Wang, M., Chong Peiwen, & Shimin Chan, G. (2009). More Than Just Free Content: Motivations of Peer-to-Peer File Sharers. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 33, 206–221. doi:10.1177/0196859909333697
Cohen, J. E. (1999). WIPO Copyright Treaty Implementation in the United States: Will Fair Use Survive? European Intellectual Property Review, 21, 236–247.
Cotter, T. F. (2007). Fair Use and Copyright Overenforcement. de Jong, J. P. J., Kalvet, T., & Vanhaverbeke, W. (2010). Exploring a theoretical framework to structure the public policy implications of open innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(8), 877–896. doi:10.1080/09537325.2010.522771
Depoorter, B., & Parisi, F. (2002). Fair use and copyright protection: a price theory explanation. International Review of Law and Economics, 21(4), 453–473.
Duesenberry, J. (1956). Innovation and Growth. The American Economic Review, 46(2), 134–141.
Dufft, Nicole (2006) ‘Digital Video Usage and DRM: Results from European Consumer Surveys’, Berlecon Research, Available at: http://indicare.org/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=178.
Eisenschitz, T., & Turner, P. (1997a). Rights and responsibilities in the digital age: problems with stronger copyright in an information society. Journal of Information Science, 23(3), 209–223. doi:10.1177/016555159702300305
Eisenschitz, T., & Turner, P. (1997b). Rights and responsibilities in the digital age: problems with stronger copyright in an information society. Journal of Information Science, 23, 209–223. doi:10.1177/016555159702300305
Enkel, E., Gassmann, O., & Chesbrough, H. (2009). Open R&D and open innovation: exploring the phenomenon. R&D Management, 39(4), 311–316.
Frischmann, B. M., & Lemley, M. A. (2006). Spillovers. American Law & Economics Association Annual Meetings (p. 27).
Gaffney, B. J. (2000). Copyright Statutes that Regulate Technology: a Comparative Analysis of the Audio Home Recording Act and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. Wash. L. Rev., 75, 611.
Gibson, J. (2007). Risk Aversion and Rights Accretion in Intellectual Property Law. The Yale Law Journal, 116(5), 882–951.
Gillespie, T. (2006). Designed to “effectively frustrate”: copyright, technology and the agency of users. New Media & Society, 8, 651–669. doi:10.1177/1461444806065662
Ginsburg, J. C. (2001). Copyright and control over new technologies of dissemination. Colum. L. Rev., 101, 1613.
Gordon, W. J. (1982). Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the “Betamax” Case and Its Predecessors. Columbia Law Review, 82(8), 1600–1657. Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1990). Trade, Innovation, and Growth. The American Economic Review, 80(2), 86–91.
Hardy, T. (1996). Property (and copyright) in cyberspace. U. Chi. Legal F., 217.
Helberger, N., & Hugenholtz, P. B. (2012). No place like home for making a copy: private copying in European copyright law and consumer law.
Klein, B., Lerner, A. V., & Murphy, K. M. (2002). The Economics of Copyright “Fair Use” in a Networked World. The American Economic Review, 92(2), 205–208.
Ku, R.S.R. (2003). Consumers and Creative Destruction: Fair Use Beyond Market Failure. Berkeley Tech. LJ, 18, 539.
Ku, Raymond Shih Ray. (2002). The Creative Destruction of Copyright: Napster and the New Economics of Digital Technology. The University of Chicago Law Review, 69(1), 263–324.
Langenderfer, J., & Kopp, S. W. (2004). The Digital Technology Revolution and Its Effect on the Market for Copyrighted Works: Is History Repeating Itself? Journal of Macromarketing, 24, 17–30. doi:10.1177/0276146704263813
Leaffer, M. (2001). The Uncertain Future of Fair Use in a Global Information Marketplace. Faculty Publications, (467).
Lemley, K. (2005). The Innovative Medium Defense: A Doctrine to Promote the Multiple Goals of Copyright in the Wake of Advancing Digital Technologies. Penn State Law Review, 110. Retrieved from http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/dlr110&div=11&id=&page=
Lerner, J. (2002). Boom and bust in the venture capital industry and the impact on innovation. Harvard NOM Working Paper No. 03-13.
Leval, P. N. (1990). Toward a Fair Use Standard. Harvard Law Review, 103(5), 1105–1136.
Litman, J. (2002). War Stories. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 20. Retrieved from http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/caelj20&div=20&id=&page=
Litman, J. D. (2006). Lawful Personal Use. University of Michigan Legal Working Paper Series, 62.
Loren, L. P. (1997). Redefining the Market Failure Approach to Fair Use in an Era of Copyright Permission Systems. Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 5(1).
Lunney, G. S. (2001). The Death of Copyright: Digital Technology, Private Copying, and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Virginia Law Review, 87(5), 813–920.
Madison, M. (2008). Rewriting Fair Use and the Future of Copyright Reform.
Madison, M. J. (2004). A Pattern-Oriented Approach to Fair Use. Wm and Mary L. Rev., 45, 1525–2425.
Marshall, L. (2004). The Effects of Piracy Upon the Music Industry: a Case Study of Bootlegging. Media, Culture & Society, 26, 163–181. doi:10.1177/0163443704039497
McKuin, J. L. (1993). Home Audio Taping of Copyrighted Works and the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992: A Critical Analysis. Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal, 16.
Moore, R. A. (2007). Fair Use and Innovation Policy. NYUL Rev., 82, 944.
Netanel, N. W. (1996). Copyright and a Democratic Civil Society. The Yale Law Journal, 106(2), 283–387.
Plant, Arnold, (1934) The economics of copyright in books, Economica (NS) l, 167- 195.
Rob, R., & Waldfogel, J. (2004). Piracy on the high C’s: Music downloading, sales displacement, and social welfare in a sample of college students. National Bureau of Economic Research.
Rogers, M. (1998). The definition and measurement of innovation. Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar.bib?q=info:5oErPpbtQl8J:scholar.google.com/&output=citation&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&ct=citation&cd=24
Sag, M. (2005). God in the Machine: A New Structural Analysis of Copyright’s Fair Use Doctrine. Northwestern Law Legal Working Paper Series, (4).
Samuelson, P. (2001). Toward a new politics of intellectual property. Communications of the ACM, 44(3), 98–99.
Samuelson, Pamela. (2002). Copyright and Freedom of Expression in Historical Perspective. Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 10. Retrieved from http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/intpl10&div=20&id=&page=
Schumpeter, J. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Harper, New York.
Sharp, J. (2002). COMING SOON TO PAY-PER-VIEW: HOW THE DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT ENABLES DIGITAL CONTENT OWNERS TO CIRCUMVENT EDUCATIONAL FAIR USE. American Business Law Journal, 40(1), 1–81. doi:10.1111/j.1744-1714.2002.tb00910.x
Tehranian, J. (2005). Et Tu, Fair Use? The Triumph of Natural Law Copyright. UC Davis Law Review, 38. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=486283#
Tushnet, R. (2004). Copy This Essay: How Fair Use Doctrine Harms Free Speech and How Copying Serves It. The Yale Law Journal, 114(3), 535–590.
Varian, H. R. (2005). Copying and copyright. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(2), 121–138. Von Lohmann, F. (2008). Fair Use as Innovation Policy. Berkley Technology Law Journal, Vol. 23, No. 2, 2008.
Yar, M. (2005). The global “epidemic” of movie “piracy”: crime-wave or social construction? Media, Culture & Society, 27, 677–696. doi:10.1177/0163443705055723