In recent years, the importance of intangible assets has grown significantly. Intellectual creations, one of the most common forms of intangible assets, have two aspects: products which should be owned, and culture which should be shared. With the development of duplication technology, this duality has sparked various discussions and movements.

This paper focuses on two issues related to intellectual creations: copyright, which represents the concept of ownership; and libraries for sharing. It explores the direction of intellectual property strategy that accounts for shared ownership.

Intellectual creations as both products and culture

Intellectual creations such as documents, musics, illustrations, and programs have two contradictory aspects, especially in relations to duplication.

First, as products, the creators must receive monetary compensation accordingly. They must be distributed as controlled products, and uncontrolled copies (i.e. pirated copies) are harmful to the creators.

On the other hand, when viewed from the perspective of cultures shared by all of humanity, these creations gain value through widespread enjoyment. In other words, the more duplication and the more use produce the more cultural value.

Thus, intellectual creations have two aspects: "products to be controlled" and "things to be disseminated as culture." Copyright embodies the former, while libraries such as open source software embody the latter.

This duality has become more apparent with the development of duplication technology.

Inseparability of "copy" and "copyright"

The concept of copyright is said to date back to ancient age, but the invention of letterpress printing by Gutenberg and the rise of citizens as represented by the French Revolution made the concept socially recognized and enshrined in law. Intellectual creations that had been transmitted among priests and others in the form of handwritten manuscripts and letters, became available to general citizens as printed materials. As a result, people began to be aware of copyright, which protects the rights of creators.

The earliest laws to establish copyright are the Statute of Anne in 1710 in the UK and the Copyright Act of 1791 and 1793 in France. These laws allowed creators to earn money by "selling" their creations without relying on financial support from patrons, and also prohibited citizens from free riding through unauthorized copying.

This system would not have been possible without the duplication technology and a lot of citizens who could purchase legitimate copies. The technology of "copying" and “copyright” are inseparably related.

Copyright controversy in the early days of digitalization

Although copyright was established in this way, various debates have been held due to the subsequent evolution of duplication technology etc. In particular, the emergence of digital creations such as computer software and CDs has sparked various debates.

Digital creations generally have the characteristic that they do not deteriorate when copied, which makes it possible to make copies that are identical to the original, which is convenient for creating pirated copies. For this reason, various copy protection technologies have been introduced to digital creations to prevent piracy. Meanwhile, software that remove these copy protections has also appeared, sparking significant controversy. In one case, a user asked a software company to remove the copy protection so that they could make a backup. The company responded as "If your work is that important, why would you be reluctant to buy one more package of the software?" The user wanted the right to use the software (i.e. "culture"), while the manufacturer was probably thinking about selling a "product."

Even now, the issues of rights and amount of compensation are still on discussions. However, many of the issues have been resolved through legal reforms, sales strategies, and technological innovation. Low-price software and music sold online have reduced the need for copying. Technology has also been introduced to limit the number of copies that can be made of videos and music. NFTs, a system for certifying the "authenticity" of digital works, have also been created. There are also examples of changes in sales strategies for CDs and magazines, such as offering "freebies."

From "Free Software" to "Open Source Software"

On the other hand, the advancement of digitalization has made it easier to duplicate works, thereby enhancing the "cultural" aspect of intellectual creations.

Academic journals have traditionally emphasized their "cultural" nature and have been intended to be shared, even though they are sold for a fee. There are also examples of collaborative writing, such as N. Bourbaki's Éléments de mathématique.

This trend to share information within groups has been further fostered by computer user communities. The development and spread of the personal computer itself were in part due to the desire to realize the idea of having computers not managed by companies or universities but in their own hands. So, it was natural for people to exchange and share programs.

As a result of this trend, freeware, i.e. software with free use and free of charge, became popular. However, as software development went beyond the scope of volunteer work, some people began to consider a compromise with commercialism. This led to the concept of open source software, which places emphasis on making the contents of the software public rather than on free of charge.

The scope of open source software has expanded greatly, from basic software (OS) to office software and AI libraries.

On the other hand, the idea of free software libraries for culture sharing is still alive. Releasing programs to a representative library remains a de facto standard among engineers today.

Even in fields other than computer software, there are activities to make the public library of the documents that are no longer under copyright, and to prescribe marks that declare permission to copy and reuse. These can be seen as activities that aim to create a shared library of intellectual creations. On some viewpoint, generative AI can also be considered a library of intellectual creations with highly advanced search functions.

Challenges of "sharing" and re-evaluation of "ownership"

While the movement to create libraries is progressing in this way, some challenges are also emerging.

One is the financial issue of how to raise fees to compensate the creators of intellectual works and for the cost of maintaining the library. The issue of copyright for the learning information of generative AI is one example. The discussion is still ongoing, and we are currently at the stage where attempts are being made to find solutions, such as utilizing copyrights and donation systems.

Another problem is library overload: when libraries grow too big, it becomes hard to find what you actually want.

There are two ways to solve this problem. One is to allow users to participate in, and modify under certain conditions, the library.

The other is to give up using libraries and to own the things one likes as products. The return to products and ownership, such as the hundreds of thousands of people gathering at animation-oriented “doujinshi” sales events and the boom in vinyl records and film cameras, can be seen as manifestations of this.

Intellectual property strategy with wide range methods

Currently, there are a variety of options available to those who handle intellectual creations. One end is to keep them as pure commercial products under strict control of patents and copyrights. Another end is to distribute them in libraries as pure cultural property.

There are companies that maintain high quality by strictly managing their products. On the other hand, emphasizing the cultural aspect can lead to the acquisition of other intangible assets such as human resources and ecosystems, which can be beneficial not only for the public good but also for private interests.

The first prerequisite for intellectual properties strategy would be to ensure sustainability, including compensation for creators. It is then necessary, with awareness of the option of sharing, to make an active choice about the balance between ownership and sharing.

Original in Japanese:
https://www.dlri.co.jp/report/dlri/377701.html