Self-Actualization and the Need to Create As a Limit on Copyright

C. S. Yoo
{"title":"Self-Actualization and the Need to Create As a Limit on Copyright","authors":"C. S. Yoo","doi":"10.1017/9781108671101.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Personhood theory is almost invariably cited as one of the primary theoretical bases for copyright. The conventional wisdom views creative works as the embodiment of their creator’s personality. This unique connection between authors and their works justifies giving authors property interests in the results of their creative efforts. \n \nThis Chapter argues that the conventional wisdom is too limited. It offers too narrow a vision of the ways that creativity can develop personality by focusing exclusively on the results of the creative process and ignoring the self-actualizing benefits of the creative process itself. German aesthetic theory broadens the understanding of the interactions between creativity and personality. Psychologists, aestheticians, and philosophers have underscored how originating creative works can play an important role in self-actualization. When combined with the insight creative works frequently borrow from the corpus of existing works, this insight provides a basis for this insight provides a basis for broadening fair use rights. Moreover, to the extent that works must be shared with audiences or a community of like-minded people in order to be meaningful, it arguably supports a right of dissemination. \n \nThe result is a theory that values the creative process for the process itself and not just for the artifacts it creates, takes the interests of follow-on authors seriously, and provides an affirmative theory of the public domain. The internal logic of this approach carries with it a number of limitations, specifically that any access rights be limited to uses that are noncommercial and educational and extend no farther than the amount needed to promote self-actualization.","PeriodicalId":424117,"journal":{"name":"The Cambridge Handbook of Copyright Limitations and Exceptions","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Cambridge Handbook of Copyright Limitations and Exceptions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108671101.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Personhood theory is almost invariably cited as one of the primary theoretical bases for copyright. The conventional wisdom views creative works as the embodiment of their creator’s personality. This unique connection between authors and their works justifies giving authors property interests in the results of their creative efforts. This Chapter argues that the conventional wisdom is too limited. It offers too narrow a vision of the ways that creativity can develop personality by focusing exclusively on the results of the creative process and ignoring the self-actualizing benefits of the creative process itself. German aesthetic theory broadens the understanding of the interactions between creativity and personality. Psychologists, aestheticians, and philosophers have underscored how originating creative works can play an important role in self-actualization. When combined with the insight creative works frequently borrow from the corpus of existing works, this insight provides a basis for this insight provides a basis for broadening fair use rights. Moreover, to the extent that works must be shared with audiences or a community of like-minded people in order to be meaningful, it arguably supports a right of dissemination. The result is a theory that values the creative process for the process itself and not just for the artifacts it creates, takes the interests of follow-on authors seriously, and provides an affirmative theory of the public domain. The internal logic of this approach carries with it a number of limitations, specifically that any access rights be limited to uses that are noncommercial and educational and extend no farther than the amount needed to promote self-actualization.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自我实现与创作对版权的限制
人格理论几乎总是被引用为著作权的主要理论基础之一。传统观念认为,创造性作品是创作者个性的体现。作者和他们的作品之间的这种独特联系,证明了在作者的创作成果中给予他们财产利益是合理的。本章认为,传统智慧太过局限。它只关注创造过程的结果,而忽视了创造过程本身的自我实现的好处,从而对创造力发展个性的方式提供了过于狭隘的看法。德国美学理论拓宽了对创造力与个性之间相互作用的理解。心理学家、美学家和哲学家都强调了原创创作在自我实现中扮演的重要角色。当与创造性作品经常借用现有作品语料库的洞察力相结合时,这种洞察力为这种洞察力提供了基础,这种洞察力为扩大合理使用权利提供了基础。此外,在某种程度上,作品必须与观众或志同道合的人分享才能有意义,可以说它支持了传播权。其结果是一种理论,它重视创作过程本身,而不仅仅是它所创造的人工制品,认真对待后续作者的兴趣,并提供了一种公共领域的肯定理论。这种方法的内在逻辑带有许多限制,特别是任何访问权都限于非商业和教育用途,并且不得超过促进自我实现所需的数量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Debunking the Fair Use vs. Fair Dealing Myth: Have We Had Fair Use All Along? Fair Use As an Advance on Fair Dealing? Depolarizing the Debate From Fair Dealing to User-Generated Content: Legal La La Land in Hong Kong “Fair Use” through Fundamental Rights in Europe: When Freedom of Artistic Expression Allows Creative Appropriations and Opens Up Statutory Copyright Limitations Self-Actualization and the Need to Create As a Limit on Copyright
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1