The first rule of writing is an important one: writers should not plagiarize; what they write should be their own. It is taken for granted. But who made the rule? Why? And how is it enforced? This dissertation traces the history of proprietary authorship from the earliest distinctions between imitation and misappropriation in the humanist schoolroom, through the first recorded uses in English of the Latin legal term plagiary (kidnapper) as a metaphor for literary misappropriation, to an inchoate conception of literary property among a coterie of writers in early modern England. It argues that the recognition of literary misappropriation emerged as a result of the instrumental reading habits of early humanist scholars and that the subsequent distinction between authors and plagiarists depended more upon the maturity of the writer than has been previously recognized. Accusations of plagiarism were a means of discrediting a rival, although in this capacity their import also depended largely upon one’s perspective. In the absence of established trade customs, writers had to subscribe to the proprieties of the institutions with which they were affiliated. They were deemed plagiarists only when their actions were found to be out of place. These proprieties not only informed early modern definitions of plagiarism; they also helped define the perimeters of proprietary authorship. Authors who wished to make a fair profit from labours in print had to conform to the regulations of the Stationer’s Company, just as authors who maintained a proprietary interest in their manuscripts had to draw upon legal rhetoric, such as plagiary, in the absence of a legally recognized notion of authorial property. With new information technologies expanding the boundaries of proprietary authorship everyday, the proprieties according to which these boundaries were first defined should help teachers and researchers not only better to understand the nature of Renaissance authorship but also to equip their students for the future.

The first rule of writing is an important one: writers should not plagiarize; what they write should be their own. It is taken for granted. But who made the rule? Why? And how is it enforced? This dissertation traces the history of proprietary authorship from the earliest distinctions between imitation and misappropriation in the humanist schoolroom, through the first recorded uses in English of the Latin legal term plagiary (kidnapper) as a metaphor for literary misappropriation, to an inchoate conception of literary property among a coterie of writers in early modern England. It argues that the recognition of literary misappropriation emerged as a result of the instrumental reading habits of early humanist scholars and that the subsequent distinction between authors and plagiarists depended more upon the maturity of the writer than has been previously recognized. Accusations of plagiarism were a means of discrediting a rival, although in this capacity their import also depended largely upon one’s perspective. In the absence of established trade customs, writers had to subscribe to the proprieties of the institutions with which they were affiliated. They were deemed plagiarists only when their actions were found to be out of place. These proprieties not only informed early modern definitions of plagiarism; they also helped define the perimeters of proprietary authorship. Authors who wished to make a fair profit from labours in print had to conform to the regulations of the Stationer’s Company, just as authors who maintained a proprietary interest in their manuscripts had to draw upon legal rhetoric, such as plagiary, in the absence of a legally recognized notion of authorial property. With new information technologies expanding the boundaries of proprietary authorship everyday, the proprieties according to which these boundaries were first defined should help teachers and researchers not only better to understand the nature of Renaissance authorship but also to equip their students for the future.

No description available.

"Thèse présentée à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de docteur en droit" / Faut-il introduire dans les législations sur le droit d'auteur un droit de distribution électronique? Voilà la question à laquelle cette étude tente de répondre. L'introduction d'un droit spécifique pour répondre aux phénomènes de transmission numérique des oeuvres a été considérée au plus haut niveau des instances internationales. Elle constitue l'une des solutions proposées lors des négociations des traités de l'OMPI de 1996, à côté de celle du droit de mise à disposition qui emportera finalement la faveur des plénipotentiaires. Au-delà de cette actualité, le sujet de la distribution invite à examiner sous plusieurs angles la structure patrimoniale du droit d'auteur, son histoire aussi, comment il a su évoluer et répondre, au cours des siècles et depuis l'imprimerie, aux nouvelles techniques de distribution des oeuvres. En fin de compte, c'est la portée du droit d'auteur, son impact sur l'exploitation commerciale d'un bien tout particulier, d'un bien intangible, qui sera étudiée. Nous verrons, en réalité, que cette discipline de la propriété intellectuelle prend une place prépondérante dans la nouvelle économie, celle de la société de l'information et qu'elle pose certainement les bases d'un nouveau système normatif qui supplante à la fois le droit des biens et le droit commercial. Cette étude annonce finalement l'avènement d'un nouveau système normatif. / Should a digital distribution right be introduced in copyright law ? This study will attempt to answer the question. The introduction of a specific right to respond to the digital transmission of works has been pondered at the highest level of international institutions. The digital distribution right was considered as a serious option, together with the «making available» right, during the negotiations of the WIPO treaties of 1996. Over and above this consideration, the subject of distribution invites one to examine, from general perspectives, the economic structure of copyright, as weIl as its history, how it evolved and responded to new technological ways of distributing a work throughout the centuries starting form the beginnings of the printing press. All things considered, the scope of copyright and its impact on the exploitation of a particular good - the intangible good - will be studied. We will observe that copyright law plays a major l'ole in the new economy of the information society. It lays down the foundation of a new normative system for distribution of intangibles, transcending both property and commercial law.

Faut-il introduire dans les législations sur le droit d'auteur un droit de distribution électronique? Voilà la question à laquelle cette étude tente de répondre. L'introduction d'un droit spécifique pour répondre aux phénomènes de transmission numérique des oeuvres a été considérée au plus haut niveau des instances internationales. Elle constitue l'une des solutions proposées lors des négociations des traités de l'OMPI de 1996, à côté de celle du droit de mise à disposition qui emportera finalement la faveur des plénipotentiaires. Au-delà de cette actualité, le sujet de la distribution invite à examiner sous plusieurs angles la structure patrimoniale du droit d'auteur, son histoire aussi, comment il a su évoluer et répondre, au cours des siècles et depuis l'imprimerie, aux nouvelles techniques de distribution des oeuvres. En fin de compte, c'est la portée du droit d'auteur, son impact sur l'exploitation commerciale d'un bien tout particulier, d'un bien intangible, qui sera étudiée. Nous verrons, en réalité, que cette discipline de la propriété intellectuelle prend une place prépondérante dans la nouvelle économie, celle de la société de l'information et qu'elle pose certainement les bases d'un nouveau système normatif qui supplante à la fois le droit des biens et le droit commercial. Cette étude annonce finalement l'avènement d'un nouveau système normatif. / Should a digital distribution right be introduced in copyright law ? This study will attempt to answer the question. The introduction of a specific right to respond to the digital transmission of works has been pondered at the highest level of international institutions. The digital distribution right was considered as a serious option, together with the «making available» right, during the negotiations of the WIPO treaties of 1996. Over and above this consideration, the subject of distribution invites one to examine, from general perspectives, the economic structure of copyright, as weIl as its history, how it evolved and responded to new technological ways of distributing a work throughout the centuries starting form the beginnings of the printing press. All things considered, the scope of copyright and its impact on the exploitation of a particular good - the intangible good - will be studied. We will observe that copyright law plays a major l'ole in the new economy of the information society. It lays down the foundation of a new normative system for distribution of intangibles, transcending both property and commercial law. / "Thèse présentée à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de docteur en droit"