Law and Philosophy

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 1–48 | Cite as

Kant, Copyright and Communicative Freedom

  • Anne BarronEmail author


The rapid recent expansion of copyright law worldwide has sparked efforts to defend the ‘public domain’ of non-propertized information, often on the ground that an expansive public domain is a condition of a ‘free culture’. Yet questions remain about why the public domain is worth defending, what exactly a free culture is, and what role (if any) authors’ rights might play in relation to it. From the standard liberal perspective shared by many critics of copyright expansionism, the protection of individual expression by means of marketable property rights in authors’ works serves as an engine of progress towards a fully competitive ‘marketplace of ideas’ – though only if balanced by an extensive public domain from which users may draw in the exercise of their own expressivity. This article shows that a significantly different, and arguably richer, conception of what a free culture is and how authors’ rights underpin it emerges from a direct engagement with the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. For Kant, progress towards a fully emancipated (i.e. a ‘mature’ or ‘enlightened’) culture can only be achieved through the critical intellectual activity that public communication demands: individual expressive freedom is only a condition, not constitutive, of this ‘freedom to make public use of one’s reason in all matters’. The main thesis defended in this article is that when Kant’s writings on publicity (critical public debate) are read in relation to his writings on the legal organization of publishing, a necessary connection emerges between authors’ rights – as distinct from copyrights – and what Jürgen Habermas and others have named the public sphere. I conclude that it is the public sphere, and not the public domain as such, that should serve as the key reference point in any evaluation of copyright law’s role in relation to the possibility of a free culture.


Public Sphere Public Reason Copyright Infringement Practical Philosophy Moral Autonomy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anne Barron, “Copyright Infringement, ‘Free-Riding’ and the Lifeworld” in L. Bently, J. Davis and J. Ginsburg (eds.) Copyright and Piracy: An Interdisciplinary Critique (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp.93-127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Charles R. Beitz, “The Moral Rights of Creators of Artistic and Literary Works” Journal of Political Philosophy 13(3) (2005) pp.330-358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Seyla Benhabib, The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents, and Citizens (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Yochai Benkler, “Free as the Air to Common Use: First Amendment Constraints on Enclosure of the Public Domain” 74 (1999) New York University Law Review pp.354-446Google Scholar
  5. Yochai Benkler, “Siren Songs and Amish Children: Autonomy, Information and Law” 76 (2001) New York University Law Review pp.23-113Google Scholar
  6. Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2006)Google Scholar
  7. James Bohmann, “The Public Spheres of the World Citizen” In J. Bohmann and M. Lutz-Bachmann (eds.) Perpetual Peace: Essays on Kant’s Cosmopolitan Ideal (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997), pp. 179-200Google Scholar
  8. James Boyle, “The Second Enclosure Movement and the Construction of the Public Domain” Law & Contemporary Problems 66 (2003) pp.33-74Google Scholar
  9. Boyle, James and Lessig, Lawrence (eds.), ‘Cultural Environmentalism @ 10’, a special issue of Law and Contemporary Problems 70(2) (2007).Google Scholar
  10. James Boyle, The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008)Google Scholar
  11. B. Sharon Byrd and Joachim Hruschka, Kant’s Doctrine of Right: A Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010)Google Scholar
  12. Georg Cavallar, Kant and the Theory and Practice of International Right (Cardiff: University of Wales Press 1999)Google Scholar
  13. Joseph Chan, “Raz on Liberal Rights and Common Goods” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 15 (1995) pp.15-31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Olha O. Cherednychenko, “Fundamental Rights and Private Law: A Relationship of Subordination or Complementarity?” Utrecht Law Review 3(2) (2007) pp.1-25Google Scholar
  15. John Christman and Joel Anderson, Autonomy and the Challenges to Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), General Comment No. 17 U.N. Doc. E/C.12/GC/17 (Nov. 21, 2005).Google Scholar
  17. Katerina Deligiorgi, Kant and the Culture of Enlightenment (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2005)Google Scholar
  18. Drahos, Peter with Braithwaite, John, Information Feudalism (London: Earthscan, 2002)Google Scholar
  19. Abraham Drassinower, “A Rights-Based View of the Idea/Expression Dichotomy in Copyright Law” Canadian Journal of Law and & Jurisprudence 16 (2003) pp.3-21Google Scholar
  20. Abraham Drassinower, “Taking User Rights Seriously” in Michael Geist, ed., In the Public Interest: The Future of Canadian Copyright Law, (Toronto: Irwin Law, 2005), pp.462-479Google Scholar
  21. Abraham Drassinower, “Authorship as Public Address: On the Specificity of Copyright vis-à-vis Patent and Trade-Mark” Michigan State Law Review 1 (2008) pp.199Google Scholar
  22. Abraham Drassinower, “From Distribution to Dialogue: Remarks on the Concept of Balance in Copyright Law” 34(4) (2009) Journal of Corporation Law pp. 991-1007Google Scholar
  23. Abraham Drassinower, “Capturing Ideas: Copyright and the Law of First Possession” (2006) 54 Cleveland State Law Review 191Google Scholar
  24. Drassinower, Abraham, ‘Copyright Infringement as Compelled Speech’ (2011) (draft on file with the author).Google Scholar
  25. Gerald Dworkin, The Theory and Practice of Autonomy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991)Google Scholar
  26. Elisabeth Ellis, Kant’s Politics: Provisional Theory for an Uncertain World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2005)Google Scholar
  27. Fichte, Johann G., ‘Proof of the Unlawfulness of Reprinting’ (Berlinische Monatschrift (1793), pp. 443–482), trans. Martha Woodmansee, in L. Bently and M. Kretschmer (eds.), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450–1900) (available at:
  28. Katrin Flikschuh, Kant and Modern Political Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Katrin Flikschuh, Freedom: Contemporary Liberal Perspectives (Cambridge: Polity Press 2007)Google Scholar
  30. Christophe Geiger, “‘Constitutionalising’” Intellectual Property Law? The Influence of Fundamental Rights on Intellectual Property in the European Union” IIC 37 (2006) pp.371-406Google Scholar
  31. Dena Goodman, The Republic of Letters: A Cultural History of the French Enlightenment (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994)Google Scholar
  32. Lucie M.C.R. Guibault, Copyright Limitations and Contracts (The Hague, London and Boston: Kluwer, 2002)Google Scholar
  33. Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society (1962) (Cambridge: Polity, 1989)Google Scholar
  34. David Hesmondhalgh, The Cultural Industries 2nd ed. (London: Sage, 2007)Google Scholar
  35. Otfried Höffe, Kant’s Cosmopolitan Theory of Law and Peace, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006)Google Scholar
  36. Anthony M. Honoré, “Ownership” in A. G. Guest (ed.) Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence (Oxford: Clarendon, 1961)Google Scholar
  37. Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason (1781) (trans. P. Guyer and A. Wood) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).Google Scholar
  38. Immanuel Kant, “An Answer to the Question: ‘What is Enlightenment?’” (1784) in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998) pp.17-22Google Scholar
  39. Immanuel Kant, “On the Wrongfulness of Unauthorised Publication of Books” (1785) in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998) pp.29-35Google Scholar
  40. Immanuel Kant, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (1785) in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998), pp.41-108Google Scholar
  41. Immanuel Kant, “What is Orientation in Thinking” (1786) in H. Reiss (ed.) Kant’s Political Writings (2nd ed.) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), pp.237-49Google Scholar
  42. Immanuel Kant, Critique of Practical Reason (1788) in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998), pp.137-271Google Scholar
  43. Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Judgment (1790) (trans. W. S. Pluhar) (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997).Google Scholar
  44. Immanuel Kant, The Metaphysics of Morals (1797), in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998), pp.353-603Google Scholar
  45. Immanuel Kant, “On the Common Saying: That may be Correct in Theory, but it is no use in Practice” (1793) in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998), pp.279-309Google Scholar
  46. Immanuel Kant, “Toward Perpetual Peace” (1795) in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998), pp.315-351Google Scholar
  47. Kant, Immanuel. Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View (1798) (trans. M. J. Gregor) (Nijhoff: The Hague, 1974)Google Scholar
  48. Christopher Kelty, Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of Free Software (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2008)Google Scholar
  49. Larry Krasnoff, “The Fact of Politics: History and Teleology in Kant” European Journal of Philosophy 2(1) (1994) pp. 22-40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Jay Lampert, “Locke, Fichte and Hegel on the Right to Property” in M. Baur and J. Russon (eds.) Hegel and the Tradition: Essays in Honour of H.S. Harris (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997), pp.40-73Google Scholar
  51. John Christian Laursen, “The Subversive Kant: The Vocabulary of ‘Public’ and ‘Publicity’” in J. Schmidt (ed.) What is Enlightenment? 18 th Century Answers and 20 th Century Questions (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996) pp. 253-269Google Scholar
  52. Mark A. Lemley, “Property, Intellectual Property, and Free Riding” Texas Law Review 83 (2005) pp.1031-1075Google Scholar
  53. Lawrence Lessig, Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity (New York: Penguin, 2004)Google Scholar
  54. Robert P. Merges, Justifying Intellectual Property (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011)Google Scholar
  55. John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1859) (London: Penguin, 1974)Google Scholar
  56. Neil W. Netanel, “Alienability Restrictions and the Enhancement of Author Autonomy in United States and Continental Copyright Law” Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal 12 (1994) 1Google Scholar
  57. Neil W. Netanel, Copyright’s Paradox (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008)Google Scholar
  58. Peter Niesen, “Colonialism and Hospitality” Politics and Ethics Review 3(1) (2007) pp. 90–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Onora O’Neill, Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989)Google Scholar
  60. Alan Patten, Hegel’s Idea of Freedom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002)Google Scholar
  61. Thomas W. Pogge, “Kant’s Theory of Justice” Kant-Studien 79 (1988) pp.407-433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Joseph Raz, The Morality of Freedom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Arthur Ripstein, Force and Freedom: Kant’s Legal and Political Philosophy (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2009)Google Scholar
  64. Cyrill P. Rigamonti, “The Conceptual Transformation of Moral Rights” (2007) 55 American Journal of Comparative Law 67Google Scholar
  65. Pamela Samuelson, “Challenges in Mapping the Public Domain” in L. Guilbault and P. B. Hugenholtz (eds.) The Future of the Public Domain: Identifying the Commons in Information Law (Kluwer: Alphen aan den Rijn, 2006), pp. 7-25Google Scholar
  66. Strömholm, Stig, Le Droit Moral de l’Auteur (2 Vols.) (Stockholm: P.A. Norstedt & Söners Förlag, 1967).Google Scholar
  67. Treiger-Bar-Am, Leslie Kim, ‘Kant on Copyright: Rights of Transformative Authorship’, Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal (2008): 1059–1103.Google Scholar
  68. Howard Williams, “Liberty, Equality and Independence: Core Concepts in Kant’s Political Philosophy” in G. Bird (ed.) A Companion to Kant (Oxford: Blackwell, 2006), pp. 364-382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Raymond Williams, Culture (London: Fontana, 1981)Google Scholar
  70. Allen W. Wood, Kant’s Ethical Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999)Google Scholar
  71. Allen Wood, Hegel’s Ethical Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Law DepartmentLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceLondonUK

Personalised recommendations