Question

For most of the 1800s, the United States did not recognize the copyrights of books written by foreign authors. As a result, many U.S. publishers printed “pirated”—unauthorized—editions of Charles Dickens and other British authors without paying them royalties. A history of book publishing noted, “[U.S.] publishers claimed that pirating [foreign] works allowed their prices to remain low, which in turn made the works more accessible to the public at large.” There were (eventually successful) attempts in Congress to recognize foreign copyrights in exchange for other countries recognizing U.S. copyrights. At the time, one U.S. publisher described these efforts as the “clamor of two hundred authors against the interests of fifty-five million people.” Do copyright laws benefit authors at the expense of readers? If so, why does the U.S. Constitution give Congress the right to enact copyright laws?

Source: J. P. Romney and Rebecca Romney, Printer’s Error: Irreverent Stories from Book History, New York: Harper, 2017, pp. 218, 227.

Answer 1

Copyright laws do benefit authors at the expense of readers as readers have to ultimately bear the burden of spending more in order to gain access to the content. This makes readers reluctant to buy new pieces of books on first hand basis and if possible they buy second hand or go to the libraries.

The U.S. constitution gives congress the right to enact copyright laws because authors provide content which is an intellectual property of that author, he/she has worked hard for it and needs proper remuneration otherwise authors would have limited incentives to bring out their creative energy to the world. Yes, readers suffer but good quality content has to be paid for only then will readers value it.