Because of the fact that the laws restricting the use of the copyrighted material has become an issue of an utter importance in the modern world, it is rather peculiar to trace the law of copyright starting from the day it emerged as a notion of the modern times in Canada, when it has become one of the most important institution that can exist in the book of law.
The roots of the copyright law can be traced in the city of Venice, where it was introduced first. Although the idea has been established long before, the modern copyright laws of Canada have a lot to do with the original set of rules.
Opening the new era of human rights to the mankind, the printing monopoly that Johannes of Speyer received in 1469 was supposed to make people respect the property of the others and understand that each man has the right to claim for the authorship to the piece of his or her intellectual work. It must be noted though that the monopoly of Speyer was not the subject completely new to people:
Ever since the thirteen century, the Venetians led Europe in their efforts to attract foreign expertise by granting monopoly rights to immigrants who brought with them new skills and techniques to the city. (Deazley 23)
The rights that the document allowed Johann Speyer to exercise and the restrictions that were cast on the use of the intellectual property of his were exclusive, since there was not a single precedent like this in the history of the mankind before. According to the document that Speyer received for the outstanding work of his,
He was given the monopoly over the art of printing as it was for five years all over Venice. The case was extraordinary for entire Europe, and this copyright law, though basing mostly on economical reasons, was a major breakthrough in the history of the copyright.
Along with the remainders of the past, there is the existing system of copyright laws in Canada. Thought much better and having more sufficient basis, the modern Canadian copyright laws have a lot in common with the Venetian breakthrough. Since the points that make the pillars that the copyright stands on are very numerous, it would be a good idea to state the very essence of the copyright in Canada. As Torremans claims,
The English law, from which the Canadian Act is derived, has developed copyright law as a species of property rights, as distinct from personality rights, notwithstanding the difficulties of reconciling the modern day peculiarities of authors’ rights with the concept of property… Copyright law in Canada reflects the theory of intellectual property which emphasizes the author’s property interests. (Torremans 62)
Thus, it becomes quite clear that the modern Canadian copyright is practically based on the interests of the owner concerning his or her own property, while the initial copyright theory suggested that the beholder of the intellectual property is supposed to have the rights over the entire art of printing.
The latter was, of course, a needless exaggeration in the modern world, while the interests of the owner and the rights to control the publications of this property or its parts were to become the major concern for the modern laws of copyright. With the amendments made to the English laws, the Canadian copyright act was to grant the people with the right to dispose of their work the way that they consider the most appropriate. It also protected the authors from the others stealing the result of their efforts.
As it can be observed, the copyright has been well developed since it was first introduced in the distant fifteenth century. To compare the two systems that existed in absolutely different time, circumstances and countries, it is necessary to compare the most important points that each of the laws covered. Campbell states the following:
Copyright protects the mode of expression of an idea. Not the idea so expressed. The Copyright Act does not give a monopoly in ideas to the author of such ideas, only to the particular form of medium for reintroducing or communicating such ideas. (Campbell 46)
Thus, the modern Canadian right is something opposite to the Venetian case when a single person was given the right over the whole art of printing for the single work of his. It must be well understood that the options that the modern copyright law gives do not cover the entire sphere of the printed art. It only restricts the use of certain carriages of the ideas that have been put into life. Here the main difference between the copyright law of Canada and the unique case in Venice lies.
It must be also mentioned that the modern copyright in Canada is quite preoccupied with the moral rights of the owner of the intellectual property as well as with the economical ones.
The author of a work has the right to the integrity of the work and, where reasonable in the circumstances, the right to be associated with the work as its author by name or under a pseudonym. (Campbell 52)
Meanwhile, the copyright that Johannes of Speyer was granted in Venice had rather economical reasons than the ideas of the moral rights of the owner. However, this could be explained by the fact that the copyright was only beginning to develop and it could not embrace the whole range of the subjects as the modern copyright does, supported by the numerous theories appeared recently.
The copyright is not a single law anymore, falling into several separate acts: “The economic rights associated with copyright comprise a defined bundle of rights.” (Campbell 47).
Drawing the parallel between the two acts of the copyright fulfillment, it can be said that the Canadian copyright system definitely roots from the Venetian ideas that were suggested in the distant fifteenth century and are still relevant to the system of laws.
The historic precedent has created the ground for the copyright law to be developed into a well-thought system and help people to acknowledge their rights for the things and pieces of art that they have created. The authors of the new inventions are just as important as their creations, which must be well remembered. However, the significant differences between the two examples make people think that the modern system of copyright has been developed into a social institute.
With the modern copyright laws existing in Canada it could be assumed that every single invention will be carved in the history together with its author.
Such humanistic approach signifies that the changes which the copyright law has undergone are tremendous. Despite the similar structure, the two examples are miles away from each other. And it can be said with a great degree of certainty that the modern copyright laws are composed in such a way so as to make the authors of the works maximally safe from the violation of their rights to own and dispose of the result of their intellectual work.
Thus, the modern copyright laws are created in such a way that the authors could feel that their creation belongs to them entirely. Such situation is perhaps the best way out that can be suggested. The acknowledgement of the owner’s rights thus does not conflict with the other people enjoying or making use of the new invention or idea.
Works Cited
Deazley, Ronan, Kretschmer, Martin and Lionel Bentley. Privilege and Property. Essays on the History of Copyright. New York, NY: Open Book Publishers, 2010. Print.
Campbell, Dennis and Susan Cotter. Copyright Infringement. Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 1998. Print.
Torremans, Paul. Copyright Law: A Handbook of Contemporary Research. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2007. Print.