Intellectual property relies on the control impulse and the political dynamics created by this impulse are detrimental to cultural change. “Intellectual property allows people to own the products of their creativity – ensuring, crucially, that there is something to be sold – and therefore to exercise both economic and moral rights over these products” . The assumption of copyright law is that an individual author exists. This postulation takes up the issues of authorship.
U. S. copyright law is greatly reliant on the notion of proprietary author that appeared in the 18th century. In U. S. law, a literary work is distinct as anything from a book to a computer program and thus proprietary authorship broadens to expressions in any medium. Copyright is culturally shored up by our impression of authorship as an individual occupation. To label someone a literary author, an artist, or musician, is to produce an influential cultural image — a creative genius working to produce the masterworks of the century, often under harsh conditions.
In reality, copyright in the United States protects the main cultural industries far better than the individual author. Most cultural products are not the property of the maker, but of their employers (Vaver, 1990). Highlighting a way in which the author confers legitimacy to a few texts and not to others is the start of a literary critique important for copyright. The discourse works to benefit the owners of information. It works to smooth over assumptions concerning authorship and to reiterate the traditional copyright story.
Exchange is distinct as theft-a fact that became more and clearer in the discussion about hackers and pirates. Robert Rotstein noted that though patent courts make every effort to convey the latest techniques in any given field into the court to aid in making decisions, the courts have not complete this courtesy in the realm of literary criticism and its applicability to copyright (Rotstein, 1993: 725). Literary criticism challenges the contemporary understanding of authorship and originality.
In accepting the proprietary author as the maker of something original, a distinguishing characteristic of the contemporary author, the commodification of literary texts is accepted (M. Rose, Authors and owners: The invention of copyright ( London & Cambridge MA: Harvard University 1993, 1). The boundary between texts of any kind, contrary to legal definitions, are permeable and uneven. However, texts in the information age are particularly difficult to place boundaries around.
The individual proprietary author is in numerous ways a myth of the copyright system that ignores the manner cultural production operates. Culturalization of Economy In the 1990s, throughout years of economic collapse and chaos, the question arose as to what was the base of state funding. What should it fund and how should it do so? Was it to remain in the framework of patrimony to be promoted and persistent by the state apparatus, as it had been up to 1989, or was it to get its way in the market place, somehow linked to the new utilization preferences of the population?
At certain levels the state was not going to let go – it sustained to have a central role in print and broadcast media regulation, and this has lately got tighter (Danks, 2001; Freeland, 2003). The issue of defending a national patrimony looms large, particularly when linked to the nationality questions in the regions, where discussions are subjugated by questions of the different rights of state, ethnicity and minority groups to conserve and promote their cultural heritage.
This is not a debate constrained to policy elites – “high culture” has a widespread role in civil society and is seen as a vital part of identity making, not just in giving a sense of national identity but also of personal survival in hard times (Causey, 2002). “Creative people have become the drivers of the contemporary economy and society, where businesses seek to locate in places where clusters of creative people mare, rather than people locating where businesses are, as most economic geography assumes” .
This current project to encourage cultural industries was set within a moderately clear narrative as a “transitional economy” where “expertise transfer” from the West would accelerate the country’s move from a command to a modern democratic and market society. “Creative industries are a manifestation of society, the richness in diversity concept. By taking this stance it is possible to incorporate the wider issues that concern society, such as the environment, urban regeneration, social cohesion and community development” .