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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
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.93-127
Charles R. Beitz, “The Moral Rights of Creators of Artistic and Literary Works” Journal of Political Philosophy 13(3) (2005) pp.330-358
Seyla Benhabib, The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents, and Citizens (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)
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.354-446
Yochai Benkler, “Siren Songs and Amish Children: Autonomy, Information and Law” 76 (2001) New York University Law Review pp.23-113
Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2006)
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. 179-200
James Boyle, “The Second Enclosure Movement and the Construction of the Public Domain” Law & Contemporary Problems 66 (2003) pp.33-74
Boyle, James and Lessig, Lawrence (eds.), ‘Cultural Environmentalism @ 10’, a special issue of Law and Contemporary Problems 70(2) (2007).
James Boyle, The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008)
B. Sharon Byrd and Joachim Hruschka, Kant’s Doctrine of Right: A Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010)
Georg Cavallar, Kant and the Theory and Practice of International Right (Cardiff: University of Wales Press 1999)
Joseph Chan, “Raz on Liberal Rights and Common Goods” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 15 (1995) pp.15-31
Olha O. Cherednychenko, “Fundamental Rights and Private Law: A Relationship of Subordination or Complementarity?” Utrecht Law Review 3(2) (2007) pp.1-25
John Christman and Joel Anderson, Autonomy and the Challenges to Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005)
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), General Comment No. 17 U.N. Doc. E/C.12/GC/17 (Nov. 21, 2005).
Katerina Deligiorgi, Kant and the Culture of Enlightenment (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2005)
Drahos, Peter with Braithwaite, John, Information Feudalism (London: Earthscan, 2002)
Abraham Drassinower, “A Rights-Based View of the Idea/Expression Dichotomy in Copyright Law” Canadian Journal of Law and & Jurisprudence 16 (2003) pp.3-21
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.462-479
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.199
Abraham Drassinower, “From Distribution to Dialogue: Remarks on the Concept of Balance in Copyright Law” 34(4) (2009) Journal of Corporation Law pp. 991-1007
Abraham Drassinower, “Capturing Ideas: Copyright and the Law of First Possession” (2006) 54 Cleveland State Law Review 191
Drassinower, Abraham, ‘Copyright Infringement as Compelled Speech’ (2011) (draft on file with the author).
Gerald Dworkin, The Theory and Practice of Autonomy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991)
Elisabeth Ellis, Kant’s Politics: Provisional Theory for an Uncertain World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2005)
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: www.copyrighthistory.org).
Katrin Flikschuh, Kant and Modern Political Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000)
Katrin Flikschuh, Freedom: Contemporary Liberal Perspectives (Cambridge: Polity Press 2007)
Christophe Geiger, “‘Constitutionalising’” Intellectual Property Law? The Influence of Fundamental Rights on Intellectual Property in the European Union” IIC 37 (2006) pp.371-406
Dena Goodman, The Republic of Letters: A Cultural History of the French Enlightenment (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994)
Lucie M.C.R. Guibault, Copyright Limitations and Contracts (The Hague, London and Boston: Kluwer, 2002)
Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society (1962) (Cambridge: Polity, 1989)
David Hesmondhalgh, The Cultural Industries 2nd ed. (London: Sage, 2007)
Otfried Höffe, Kant’s Cosmopolitan Theory of Law and Peace, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006)
Anthony M. Honoré, “Ownership” in A. G. Guest (ed.) Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence (Oxford: Clarendon, 1961)
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason (1781) (trans. P. Guyer and A. Wood) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).
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.17-22
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.29-35
Immanuel Kant, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (1785) in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998), pp.41-108
Immanuel Kant, “What is Orientation in Thinking” (1786) in H. Reiss (ed.) Kant’s Political Writings (2nd ed.) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), pp.237-49
Immanuel Kant, Critique of Practical Reason (1788) in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998), pp.137-271
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Judgment (1790) (trans. W. S. Pluhar) (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997).
Immanuel Kant, The Metaphysics of Morals (1797), in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998), pp.353-603
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.279-309
Immanuel Kant, “Toward Perpetual Peace” (1795) in Mary J. Gregor (ed.) Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998), pp.315-351
Kant, Immanuel. Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View (1798) (trans. M. J. Gregor) (Nijhoff: The Hague, 1974)
Christopher Kelty, Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of Free Software (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2008)
Larry Krasnoff, “The Fact of Politics: History and Teleology in Kant” European Journal of Philosophy 2(1) (1994) pp. 22-40
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.40-73
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. 253-269
Mark A. Lemley, “Property, Intellectual Property, and Free Riding” Texas Law Review 83 (2005) pp.1031-1075
Lawrence Lessig, Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity (New York: Penguin, 2004)
Robert P. Merges, Justifying Intellectual Property (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011)
John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1859) (London: Penguin, 1974)
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) 1
Neil W. Netanel, Copyright’s Paradox (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008)
Peter Niesen, “Colonialism and Hospitality” Politics and Ethics Review 3(1) (2007) pp. 90–108
Onora O’Neill, Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989)
Alan Patten, Hegel’s Idea of Freedom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002)
Thomas W. Pogge, “Kant’s Theory of Justice” Kant-Studien 79 (1988) pp.407-433
Joseph Raz, The Morality of Freedom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988)
Arthur Ripstein, Force and Freedom: Kant’s Legal and Political Philosophy (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2009)
Cyrill P. Rigamonti, “The Conceptual Transformation of Moral Rights” (2007) 55 American Journal of Comparative Law 67
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. 7-25
Strömholm, Stig, Le Droit Moral de l’Auteur (2 Vols.) (Stockholm: P.A. Norstedt & Söners Förlag, 1967).
Treiger-Bar-Am, Leslie Kim, ‘Kant on Copyright: Rights of Transformative Authorship’, Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal (2008): 1059–1103.
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. 364-382
Raymond Williams, Culture (London: Fontana, 1981)
Allen W. Wood, Kant’s Ethical Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999)
Allen Wood, Hegel’s Ethical Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990)
About this article
Cite this article
Barron, A. Kant, Copyright and Communicative Freedom. Law and Philos 31, 1–48 (2012) doi:10.1007/s10982-011-9114-1
- Public Sphere
- Public Reason
- Copyright Infringement
- Practical Philosophy
- Moral Autonomy