JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 1 folio : 121 --- 23/8/07 --- 11H59
[
C
Économie de la connaissance et de l’immatériel q Le capitalisme contemporain se caractérise par la coexistence de plusieurs modes de production. D’une part, le capitalisme moderne, centré sur l’utilisation de grandes masses de capital matériel, est l’héritier des premières révolutions industrielles. D’autre part, le capitalisme postmoderne, qui prend une place centrale, se développe sur l’exploitation du « capital immatériel » qualifié aussi de « capital humain » ou de « capital connaissance ». Les Anglo-saxons parlent de la naissance d’une knowledge economy, c’est-à-dire d’une économie de la connaissance, dans laquelle le poids des emplois intensifs en connaissance s’est considérablement accru, et la part du capital immatériel a dépassé celle du capital matériel dans l’appareil de production. L’économie de la connaissance correspond aujourd’hui à une nouvelle discipline en économie. Elle a donné lieu à de nombreux travaux menés par des historiens, des économistes, des philosophes dont ce chapitre tente de donner une vision d’ensemble. Ce chapitre cherche également à présenter les enjeux considérables liés à l’économie de la connaissance et de l’immatériel. Le premier défi est théorique : il est de forger un nouveau cadre d’analyse adapté à la connaissance, qui est un bien économique très particulier. Le deuxième un défi majeur est politique et concerne les décideurs publics et privés : dans la mesure où la connaissance
]
H A P I T R E
3
121
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 2 folio : 122 --- 22/8/07 --- 14H38
C H A P I T R E
3
122
[
a un caractère cumulatif, le moindre retard dans la production et la diffusion de celle-ci risque d’avoir des effets difficiles à rattraper. Les développements du chapitre sont organisés en cinq sections. Tout d’abord, nous présenterons les « faits stylisés » qui illustrent le développement de l’économie de la connaissance et de l’immatériel. Ensuite seront abordées les analyses théoriques qui permettent d’éclairer le fonctionnement de cette nouvelle économie fondée sur la connaissance et l’immatériel. Les sections 3 et 4 présentent les stratégies et les politiques des entreprises et des pouvoirs publics, qui sont deux groupes d’acteurs majeurs pour le développement de cette économie. La dernière section est consacrée à la propriété intellectuelle, institution centrale de l’économie de la connaissance. Elle montrera les difficultés des sociétés modernes à trouver un équilibre satisfaisant entre la nécessaire rémunération des entreprises innovantes et la non moins nécessaire diffusion des connaissances, bien public en principe à la disposition de tous.
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 3 folio : 123 --- 23/8/07 --- 12H0
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapitre 3. Économie de la connaissance et de l’immatériel q
[
1 q Le développement des économies fondées sur la connaissance et l’immatériel Les économies fondées sur la connaissance se sont constituées historiquement à partir d’un double phénomène 1 : d’une part, une tendance longue, caractérisée par une augmentation des ressources consacrées à l’accumulation de capital immatériel, en particulier dans le domaine des connaissances (éducation, recherche et développement, notée R&D) ; d’autre part, un changement technologique majeur, que certains observateurs qualifient de « troisième révolution industrielle », avec l’avènement des nouvelles technologies de l’information et de la communication (TIC). L’objet de cette première partie est de présenter ces deux dimensions de l’économie de la connaissance, à savoir la place croissante de l’immatériel (A) et la vague des TIC (B).
A. Une tendance longue à l’augmentation de l’immatériel 1. Le poids croissant du secteur des services Les économies peuvent être décomposées en trois secteurs – agriculture, industrie et services – dont le poids dans la production et l’emploi a considérablement évolué en longue période. Les deux siècles qui viennent de s’écouler se caractérisent par une montée en puissance de l’économie des services. On retrouve cette « tertiarisation » de l’économie dans l’importance prise par l’emploi dans les services (Figure 1). Au début du XIXe siècle, la part des services s’élevait à 15 %, celles de l’industrie et de l’agriculture à respectivement 20 % et 65 % (Jeanneney, 1985). À la fin du XXe siècle, les services emploient 72 % de la population active en France (cette proportion est de 80 % aux États-Unis), l’industrie 23,5 % et l’agriculture 4,5 %. Cette importance aujourd’hui dominante du secteur des services par rapport à ceux de l’agriculture et de l’industrie fournit une première illustration de la montée en puissance de l’immatériel en longue période. Voir sur le site Internet « L’économie de l’immatériel – La croissance de demain », Rapport de la Commission sur l’économie de l’immatériel, par Maurice Levy et Jean-Pierre Jouyet, 2006.
1 L’analyse présentée dans ce chapitre s’inspire en partie des travaux de Dominique Foray, un des spécialistes français. Voir en particulier L’économie de la connaissance, La Découverte, Repères no 302, 2000.
123
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 4 folio : 124 --- 23/8/07 --- 12H0
Oral d’économie
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 19 80 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 88 19 90 19 92 19 94 19 96 19 98 20 00 20 02
35
France
Figure 1
e
Japon
Corse
Etats-Unis
UE15
Part des emplois dans les services.
2. La montée du capital intangible Alors que le progrès au XIXe siècle se caractérise par un accroissement de la part du capital tangible au sein des facteurs de production, la croissance a changé de nature dans les dernières décennies. Celle-ci s’explique désormais en grande partie par le développement du capital immatériel (ou intangible) dont le stock en volume, a dépassé celui du capital matériel depuis 1973 aux États-Unis (Figure 2). 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 1929
1948 Capital tangible
1973
1990
Capital intangible
Figure 2 e Stock de capital réel brut domestique aux États-Unis (en milliards de dollars, année de référence 1987). Source : Kendrick (1994).
Que représente le capital immatériel ? Celui-ci est composé d’un ensemble d’actifs qui incluent le capital humain (éducation, formation, santé, compétences), les dépenses de R&D, les droits de propriété intellectuelle, les logiciels ou encore les dépenses organisationnelles. Ces investissements immatériels sont devenus essentiels dans une économie fondée sur la connaissance et les compétences : le capital immatériel explique une part croissante des gains de productivité et donc de la croissance économique. Selon les travaux de Abramovitz et David, la croissance du capital matériel (qui expliquait 2/3 des gains de productivité au XIXe siècle) ne représenterait plus que 1/4 voire 1/5 des gains de productivité au XXe siècle. Une étude réalisée par l’OCDE en 2006 montre que le capital humain serait devenu le
124
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 5 folio : 125 --- 22/8/07 --- 12H53
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapitre 3. Économie de la connaissance et de l’immatériel q principal moteur de la croissance, que le rendement de la R&D serait élevé et que l’investissement en logiciel contribue fortement à l’accroissement de la productivité du travail.
3. La connaissance au cœur du capitalisme moderne Le succès des entreprises et des économies modernes est plus que jamais dépendant des capacités à produire et à utiliser la connaissance. Les objectifs prioritaires des sociétés modernes est de promouvoir l’éducation de leurs membres, de développer la recherche et développement (R&D) afin de favoriser les innovations, particulièrement importantes aujourd’hui dans les domaines des biotechnologies et des technologies de l’information et de la communication (TIC).
a.
L’importance croissante de l’éducation Le développement d’une économie de la connaissance conduit à donner une place centrale au capital humain et notamment à l’éducation et à la formation tout au long de la vie. Tous les pays développés, certains pays d’Asie en tête, ont intégré le rôle de la formation initiale de niveau universitaire dans une économie du savoir puisque que près de la moitié de la population des 25-34 ans est titulaire d’un diplôme de l’enseignement supérieur (Figure 3). Tous les pays progressent dans ce domaine ainsi que dans celui de la formation continue, les États-Unis faisant la course en tête avec 35 % des 34-64 ans obtenant un diplôme de l’enseignement supérieur. Des pays comme la Corée du Sud ont bien compris le rôle de l’éducation et ont largement misé sur cette dimension pour rattraper leur retard. Ce pays dispose désormais d’une des populations les mieux formées en général et dans les TIC en particulier. Chez les 25-34 ans
Chez les 25-64 ans 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 France
Japon 1991
Figure 3
e
Corée
Etats-Unis
France
2003
Japon 1991
Corée
Etats-Unis
2003
Taux d’obtention d’un diplôme de l’enseignement supérieur 2
Ainsi, pour s’insérer dans l’économie de la connaissance, deux compétences apparaissent nécessaires : savoir utiliser les TIC d’une part, et acquérir les capacités d’anticipation et d’adaptation aux changements rapides de son environnement, d’autre part. L’acquisition du premier type de compétences dépend de la capacité du système éducatif à fournir les connaissances de bases (lectures, écritures, mathématiques élémentaires) et une initiation précoces (et tout au long de la vie) aux outils informatiques encore très largement dominés par l’autoformation. Elle
2
Sauf indication contraire, les graphiques et tableaux qui suivent ont pour source l’OCDE.
125
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 6 folio : 126 --- 22/8/07 --- 12H53
Oral d’économie
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
pose donc le problème de la fracture numérique qui touche certaines populations, en particulier celles exclues du monde du travail (cf. encadré p. 140). Elle pose de surcroît le problème du développement des infrastructures et de l’équipement dans les pays en développement. L’acquisition du second type de compétences renvoie à des capacités d’apprentissage (compréhension, mémorisation, raisonnement) essentielles dans l’économie de la connaissance. Elles sont principalement dispensées au sein des systèmes d’enseignement traditionnel (et en particulier de l’enseignement supérieur).
b.
Le rôle stratégique de la recherche et développement (R&D) et des brevets e
Le développement des dépenses de R&D
Dans une économie fondée sur la connaissance et l’innovation, la R&D occupe une place croissante et stratégique, de même que l’acquisition de droits sur les fruits de cette recherche. En premier lieu, il convient de noter que la R&D a crû de manière très importante dans les pays développés depuis le début des années 1980 : + 100 % dans l’UE, + 130 % aux États-Unis, + 150 % au Japon en 25 ans. Elle représente 2 à 3 % du PIB dans ces pays (Figure 4). En deuxième lieu, il faut souligner les importantes disparités qui existent entre les pays. Ainsi, la Corée du Sud et surtout la Chine, sous l’effet d’un rattrapage et de politiques volontaristes, connaissent des taux de croissance annuels moyens des dépenses en R&D impressionnants comparés à ceux des pays plus développés. Il existe aussi des différences importantes parmi ces derniers pays alors qu’elles se justifient moins, ceci est d’autant plus important à observer que l’activité de production de connaissance revêt un caractère cumulatif : un pays qui sous-investit en R&D par rapport à un autre accumule un retard qui s’amplifie, même si les écarts d’investissement restent constants. Il en va ainsi des écarts d’investissement croissants en R&D (0,5 à 1 point du PIB) entre l’UE15 et la France d’une part, les États-Unis, la Corée et le Japon, d’autre part. Nous verrons plus loin que ces écarts s’expliquent en partie par les différences entre financement public et privé de la recherche. 300000 250000 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 Etats-Unis
UE15
Japon (ajus.) 1981
Chine 1995
France
Corée
France UE15 Japon (ajus.) États-Unis Corée Chine
Taux de croissance moyen (1981-2005) 2,6 2,9
Taux de croissance moyen (1995-2005) 1,4 2,9
4,1 3,7
2,9* 4,0* 6,9 18,7
2005
* 1995-2004
Figure 4 e a) Dépense internes en R&D en millions dollars (prix constant – année de référence : 2000 et PPA – États-Unis et France : 2004 au lieu de 2005) et b) Taux de croissance de la dépenses internes en R&D, en dollars (prix constant – année de référence 2000 et PPA).
126
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 41 folio : 161 --- 23/8/07 --- 12H20
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapitre 3. Économie de la connaissance et de l’immatériel q
[
]
[
1 q Intellectual property
DOCUMENT
ENGLISH PART
Préparation à l’épreuve orale en anglais
Monopolies of the mind The world’s patent systems need reform so that innovation can be properly rewarded PATENTS, said Thomas Jefferson, should draw ”a line between the things which are worth to the public the embarrassment of an exclusive patent, and those which are not.“ As the value that society places on intellectual property has increased, that line has become murkier 1—and the cause of some embarrassment, too. Around the world, patent offices are being inundated with applications. In many cases, this represents the extraordinary inventiveness that is occurring in new fields such as the internet, genomics and nanotechnology. But another, less-acceptable reason for the flood is that patent offices have been too lax 2 in granting patents, encouraging many firms to rush to patent as many, often dubious 3, ideas as possible in an effort to erect legal obstacles to competitors. The result has been a series of messy and expensive court battles, and growing doubts about the effectiveness of patent systems as a spur 4 to innovation, just as their importance should be getting bigger. In 1998 America introduced so-called ”business-method“ patents, granting for
the first time patent monopolies simply for new ways of doing business, many of which were not so new. This was a mistake. It not only ushered in 5 a wave of new applications, but it is probably inhibiting, rather than encouraging, commercial innovation, which had never received, or needed, legal protection in the past. Europe has not, so far, made the same blunder 6, but the European Parliament is considering the easing of rules for innovations incorporated in software. This might have a similarly deleterious 7 effect as business-method patents, because many of these have been simply the application of computers to long-established practices. In Japan, firms are winning large numbers of patents with extremely narrow claims 8, mostly to obfuscate 9 what is new and so to ward off 10 rivals. As more innovation happens in China and India, these problems are likely to spread there as well. A crying need for discipline There is an urgent need for patent offices to return to first principles. A patent is a government-granted temporary monopoly (patents in most countries are given about 20 years’ protection) intended to reward innovators in exchange for a dis-
1
murkier: from murky, = dark, gloomy. lax: not strict, lenient. 3 dubious: douteuses. 4 spur: here the term means incentive. 5 ushered in: from the verb to usher in = to be a precursor of. From the French un huissier (in a theatre, a court): an usher. 6 blunder: stupid mistake. 7 deleterious: (Fr délétère), harmful, injurious. 8 claims: revendications. 9 to obfuscate: to confuse. 10 to ward off: to protect oneself from. 2
161
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 42 folio : 162 --- 27/8/07 --- 6H30
ENGLISH PART
Oral d’économie
closure 11 by the patent holder of how his invention works, thereby 12 encouraging others to further 13 innovation. The qualifying tests for patents are straightforward 14—that an idea be 15 useful, novel 16 and not obvious. Unfortunately most patent offices, swamped 17 by applications that can run to thousands of pages and confronted by companies wielding 18 teams of lawyers, are no longer applying these tests strictly or reliably 19. For example, in America, many experts believe that dubious 20 patents abound, such as the notorious 21 one for a ”sealed crustless sandwich 22“. Of the few patents that are re-examined by the Patent and Trademark Office itself, often after complaints from others, most are invalidated or their claims clipped 23 down. The number of duplicate claims among patents is far too high. What happens in America matters globally, since it is the world’s leading patent office, approving about 170,000 patents each year, half of which are granted to foreign applicants. Europe’s patent system is also in a mess in another regard: the quilt 24 of national patent offices and languages means that the cost of obtaining a patent for the entire European Union is too high, a burden 25 in particular on smaller firms and individual inventors. The European Patent Office may
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
award a patent, but the patent holder must then file 26 certified translations at national patent offices to receive protection. Negotiations to simplify this have gone on for over a decade without success. As a start, patent applications should be made public. In most countries they are, but in America this is the case only under certain circumstances, and after 18 months. More openness would encourage rivals to offer the overworked patent office evidence with which to judge whether an application is truly novel and non-obvious. Patent offices also need to collect and publish data about what happens once patents are granted—the rate at which they are challenged and how many are struck down 27. This would help to measure the quality of the patent system itself, and offer some way of evaluating whether it is working to promote innovation, or to impede 28 it. But most of all, patent offices need to find ways of applying standards more strictly. This would make patents more difficult to obtain. But that is only right. Patents are, after all, government-enforced 29 monopolies and so, as Jefferson had it, there should be some ”embarrassment“ (and hesitation) in granting them. Source: The Economist – 11.11.2004
11 disclosure: from to disclose = to reveal, to make public. (In accounting): For accounts to present fairly the situation of a company, the managers must disclose all relevant information. 12 thereby: thus = ainsi, par là-même. 13 to further: to help the progress of, to help, to push an idea. 14 straightforward: direct, honest, simple. 15 be: fairly rare use of the subjunctive form of the verb (qu’une idée soit utile...). 16 novel: original. 17 swamped: from the verb to swamp = to cover with liquid, to flood; to be swamped (in work): être débordé. 18 wielding: from the verb to wield = tu use, to handle skillfully. 19 reliable: from the verb to rely (on): compter sur. A reliable person, reliable information (fiable). 20 dubious: doubtful. 21 notorious: infamous, famous in a negative way = tristement célèbre. 22 sealed crustless sandwich: sandwich, (au pain) sans croûte, (emballé) sous blister... 23 clipped: from the verb to clip = to cut (neatly, as with scissors). 24 quilt: refers to traditional « crazy quilt », courtepointe faite de morceaux de tissus de couleurs et motifs différents. Here, it is equivalent to a mosaic. 25 burden: heavy weight. 26 file (verb to file) = constituer, déposer un dossier. 27 struck down: from the verb to strike down = to abolish, to eliminate. 28 impede: verb to impede = to block, to prevent. 29 enforced: from to enforce = to implement, to compel. A policeman is a law-enforcement officer, a person who is in charge of making sure the law is implemented.
162
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 43 folio : 163 --- 23/8/07 --- 12H21
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapitre 3. Économie de la connaissance et de l’immatériel q
A. References and definitions
Intellectual property rights traditionally include the following: – copyrights (droits d’auteur) rights which are attached to creative and artistic works. They deal with reproduction, adaptation. – Patents: (brevets) these rights cover useful, novel and non obvious technical inventions. – Trademarks: (noms de marque, marques déposées) names, brands and logos for example, which characterize particular products or companies.
ENGLISH PART
q Intellectual property
In the recent past, though, more forms of intellectual property have become protected: – industrial design (le “design” d’un produit) – trade secrets (secrets de fabrication), any confidential information (process, technique, know-how) which allows a firm to obtain a competitive advantage over its rivals. – business methods: for example a firm’s ability to study its suppliers’ costs in order to force their prices down. There is much debate in the world over the patentability of this form of IP. – domain names: (nom de domaine) for example .org, .fr. They serve to identify internet users. This field is regulated by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). – geographical indicators: (appellation d’origine protégée): for wines or cheeses coming from a particular terroir (geographical area), for example. – Software: some software remains proprietary, other software is meant to be “open source” (Linux) IP rights, in most cases, are meant to give a temporary monopoly to the rights’ holders. In exchange, the holders must release all information about their ideas. Ultimately, the idea or the invention will fall in the public domain, in which case, everyone can use them without paying a royalty (redevance)to the rights’ owners. IP rights are intended to foster innovation for the common good, not to impede it. The digitalisation of much content has boosted the number of rights infringement issues: piracy, illegal duplication (le piratage), free-riding (se comporter en passager clandestin) and counterfeiting (la contrefaçon).
q Accounting
IP rights are hard assets to value (valoriser). Part of their value may be incorporated in the goodwill of the company (survaleur, écart d’acquisition).
B. Questions and answers q Questions
1. What causes patent offices to be flooded with applications?
163
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 44 folio : 164 --- 23/8/07 --- 12H21
ENGLISH PART
Oral d’économie
164
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. What mistakes (according to The Economist) were made in developed countries? 3. What are the ”first principles“ of patents? 4. What problems arise with patents at present? 5. What specific problem does Europe meet in the field? 6. Why is more openness desirable?
q Answers
1. What causes patent offices to be flooded with applications? Two elements cause patent offices to be flooded with applications. On the one hand, extraordinary creativity is being displayed in many new fields such as nanotechnology, biotechnology and the internet. On the other hand, firms are tempted to file as many patents as they can, even if their claims are weak or dubious, in order to ward off competitors. 2. What mistakes (according to The Economist) were made in developed countries? All countries in the developed world have made, or are ready to make, mistakes. The US for example has made ”business methods“ patentable, which has exposed the US patent office to a flood of new applications. Europe is considering patenting long established practises which are incorporated in software. And Japan had allowed firms to obtain patents for very limited innovations. The fear is also that new countries, India and China for example, will play these games too. 3. What are the ”first principles“ of patents? Patents are a temporary monopoly granted by a government to an inventor in exchange for a commitment to disclose (make public) information on how the invention works. To qualify for a patent, an invention must be useful, novel and non obvious. Unfortunately, past and present practices debase those principles. For example the protection granted by patents tends to grow in duration, and lots of duplications between patents seem to happen. 4. What problems arise with patents at present? As there are two many applications for patents, sometimes of dubious value, patent offices can no longer apply strict qualifying tests. Moreover, companies often file very lengthy applications and use the services of lawyers to prove their claims. This makes the process very time-consuming and inefficient. 5. What specific problem does Europe meet in the field? Europe has a specific problem since it has not yet been able to harmonize patenting procedures across the Union. Thus, the EU has a mosaic of national procedures. Moreover, patents have to be filed in the official languages of all EU members. The need for certified translations of all documents makes applications too expensive for small firms and individuals. 6. Why is more openness desirable? Openness would allow the process to be more public. Rivals could quickly provide evidence, for example, that the firm applying does not have a truly novel invention, or that the invention actually infringes on one of their patents. After all, the patent system was originally meant to encourage innovation for the common good. Present evolutions seem to threaten this noble aim.
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 45 folio : 165 --- 23/8/07 --- 12H21
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapitre 3. Économie de la connaissance et de l’immatériel q
[
EXERCISE 03.01 Match the terms of the first list with those of the second: 1. burden a. incentive 2. counterfeit b. open 3. disclose c. not strict 4. enforce d. introduce 5. geographical indicator e. good intention 6. goodwill f. protect 7. infringe g. reveal, make public 8. lax h. reliable 9. of information you can i. strength depend on 10. open source j. regional origin 11. release k. ownership 12. spur l. use a right one is not entitled to 13. swamped m. copy illegally 14. usher in n. opposite of proprietary 15. ward off o. implement p. flooded q. heavy weight r. difference between book value and price of acquisition
ENGLISH PART
C. Exercise
ANSWER 1. q – 2. m – 3. g – 4. o – 5. j – 6. r – 7. l – 8. c – 9. h – 10. n – 11. g (same answer as for 3) – 12. a – 13. p – 14- d – 15- f
165
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 46 folio : 166 --- 27/8/07 --- 6H31
Oral d’économie
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[ ENGLISH PART
2 q Copyright law
DOCUMENT
Killing creativity IMAGINE that drug companies were so successful at lobbying governments that they won an extension of their patents from 20 years, as they are today, to 100 years; and that the scope 30 of those rights was extended so that future medical discoveries were in effect blocked. The ensuing public outcry 31would almost certainly result in the law being rewritten in favour of scientific advancement. Yet this is actually happening (and with little public scrutiny 32) in a different area of intellectual property: copyright law. As more and more forms of content go digital, the owners of that content are becoming more possessive and turning increasingly to the law for help. The result is a ”permission culture“, argues Lawrence Lessig, a professor at Stanford Law School and a leading authority on internet law, where creators increasingly need legal approval for their works, not a ”free culture“ where creativity is presumptively 33 allowed, as was the case in the past. Copyright was originally designed to restrict publishers 34 from exerting too much control over information; today it constrains individuals from creating new works. This is because, in America at least, the duration of copyrights has increased (from 28 years in the 19th century to as much as 95 years
30
today), and their scope has widened (to include all works, not just the minority that used to be registered). It now also applies to almost all media, not just printed matter, and to derivative works 35. Such broad application was never intended, nor existed, in the past. Although Mr Lessig’s analysis sticks 36 to America, the problem he identifies is increasingly a global one. As the internet and computing technology allow more efficient ways to create, share and transform content, large media companies are lobbying for laws and filing law suits 37 to preserve their businesses. Recent suits by the Recording Industry Association of America for millions of dollars lost thanks to music piracy are but one example. Instead of adapting to the internet, media companies are using the law to change the very features 38 of the internet that make it so successful. Mr Lessig is no cyber-utopian promoting piracy or an end of copyright. Instead, he argues for a more reasonable balance, by redefining copyright law closer to the function that it served in the past. ”A society that defends the ideals of free culture must preserve precisely the opportunity for new creativity to threaten 39 the old,“ he writes.
scope: la portée. ensuing public outcry: les protestations publiques qui vont suivre. 32 scrutiny: careful examination. From to scrutinize: to observe carefully. 33 presumptively: supposedly, hopefully 34 publishers: les éditeurs. False friend: an editor = un rédacteur. 35 derivative works: produit dérivés. For example, a movie made on the basis of a novel, toys which use the image or name of famous animated films’ characters. 36 sticks: from the verb to stick (coller): s’en tient à, se limite à. 37 filing law suits: from to file a law suit = intenter un procès. 38 features: aspects, elements, traits. 39 threaten: (verb to theaten): menace, remettre en cause. A threat: une menace. 31
166
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 47 folio : 167 --- 23/8/07 --- 12H22
The author himself is a partisan 40. Seeing the deficiencies in copyright law, he co-founded an organisation in 2001 called Creative Commons to allow content-creators to license their works in ways that are open rather than restrictive. (Fittingly 41, ”Free Culture“ is available free online for noncommercial use under this system; within days of its release 42, the book was reproduced in numerous formats, including audio recordings.) Mr Lessig took his arguments all the way to America’s Supreme Court in October 2002. He lost, and the book in many respects is a reply to the majority of the bench 43 who ruled 44 against him. Free culture in Mr Lessig’s view is akin 45 to free markets—it does not mean a lack of regulation; it is just a vital platform for progress. Indeed, last year The Economist argued in favour of a return to the 28-year maximum copyright term 46 as a decent starting point
for reform. Among the solutions that Mr Lessig proposes—unconvincingly, alas—are copyright marking, registration and renewal, as was done in former times. His final suggestion: ”fire lots of lawyers“. Ultimately, ”Free Culture“ is about neither law nor technology, the author’s areas of expertise. It is about power. Specifically, it concerns the way in which financial and political power are used by corporations to preserve the status quo and to further their own commercial interests. This may be to the detriment of something more socially valuable: a loss of creativity that can never be measured. Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity. By Lawrence Lessig. The Penguin Press; 368 pages; $24.95 (free on the internet for non-commercial use)
ENGLISH PART
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapitre 3. Économie de la connaissance et de l’immatériel q
Source: The Economist 15.04.2004
A. Questions and answers q Questions
1. What does paragraph 1 of the text aim to show? 2. How is the difference between ”free culture and a ”permission culture“ defined? 3. How does copyright law now constrain individuals from creating new works? 4. In what ways do media companies protect their rights? 5. How does the author of the book which is reviewed in the text practice what he advocates? 6. Why would L. Lessig advocate firing lots of lawyers? 7. How is the ”free culture“ issue ultimately linked with power?
q Answers
1. What does paragraph 1 of the text aim to show? Paragraph 1 aims to show that, if the changes now taking place with copyrights were happening with the patenting of medical drugs, there would be lots of public protests.
40
partisan: strong supporter of a cause. fittingly: de façon appropriée. It is fitting to ...: il est convenable de. 42 release : publication. From to release: to publish, to circulate a document. 43 bench: court. 44 ruled: from the verb to rule = to decide, to adjudicate, to decree. 45 akin: similar to, of the same family as. 46 term: period. 41
167
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 48 folio : 168 --- 23/8/07 --- 12H22
Oral d’économie
ENGLISH PART
2. How is the difference between ”free culture“ and a ”permission culture“ defined? The ”free culture“ which prevailed in the past granted short periods of protection to authors, so that ”new creativity could threaten the old“. This was good for the common good. Today, on the contrary, media companies want to increase the duration and scope of the protection which copyrights grant them. This constrains creativity, as individuals cannot use the ideas of others. 3. How does copyright law now constrain individuals from creating new works? This is mostly achieved by increasing the duration of copyrights (from 28 to 95 years within the 20th century) and by extending the scope of these rights to all derivative works (for, example a film made from a novel). 4. In what ways do media companies protect their rights? The media companies use two weapons. First, they lobby for laws which will grant them extended rights and protection from infringement. Second, they hire many lawyers to file multimillion dollar lawsuits against anyone they suspect of infringing on their rights. 5. How does the author of the book which is reviewed in the text practice what he advocates? The author made his book freely available on the internet for non commercial use. It has already been reproduced in many formats, including audio recordings. This means he will not receive royalties for these copies (exemplaires) of his book. 6. Why would L. Lessig advocate firing lots of lawyers? He advocates firing lots of lawyers because the media companies use them to lobby the lawmakers and to file lawsuits against potential infringers. Lawyers are an excellent weapon to serve these ends, as they are familiar with the complex issues involved and can prepare hard to resist arguments. Moreover, their work takes place far from the public eye. Therefore, changes in legislation or court rulings may not make the headlines until it is too late for the public to react. 7. How is the ”free culture“ issue ultimately linked with power? ”Free culture“ is not, as one might think, a question of law or technology, but one of power because in the end big companies want to preserve the status quo. They do not want to adapt to the new environment which is largely determined by the new technologies. So, it seems they have decided to react very strongly to any challenge to their existing rights, instead of inventing new solutions.
B. Exercise
[
EXERCISE 03.02 Fill in the blanks with the appropriate terms: – available – bench – copyrights – dealing – derivative – features – filling
168
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 49 folio : 169 --- 23/8/07 --- 12H22
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
infringe lawsuit lawyers lobbying partisan publishers release royalties ruled scope scrutiny status quo sue threaten
ENGLISH PART
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapitre 3. Économie de la connaissance et de l’immatériel q
Big media companies are now ... lawmakers to extend the ... and duration of copyrights. They also ... anyone, individuals or corporations, who they think may ... on their rights. The author of “Free Culture” is a .... He thinks it is wrong for big ... to try to preserve the and to try to extend rights to all types of ... works. According to him the system of ... must preserve the opportunity for new creativity to .... the old. He would like this issue to attract more public ... . In a recent ..., though, the US Supreme court ...against him. The author made his new book freely ... on the internet. So, he will not get any ... for these copies.
ANSWER Big media companies are now lobbying lawmakers to extend the scope and duration of copyrights. They also sue anyone, individuals or corporations, who they think may infringe on their rights. The author of ”Free Culture“ is a partisan. He thinks it is wrong for big publishers to try to preserve the status quo and to try to extend rights to all types of derivative works. According to him the system of copyrights must preserve the opportunity for new creativity to threaten the old. He would like this issue to attract more public scrutiny. In a recent lawsuit, though, the US Supreme court ruled against him. The author made his new book freely available on the Internet. So, he will not get any royalties for these copies.
169
JOB : mp DIV : 10576⊕ch03 p. 50 folio : 170 --- 23/8/07 --- 12H22
Oral d’économie
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[ ENGLISH PART
3 q Theme to discuss Our world is now dominated by a new paradigm: the knowledge-based economy (from section 4 of the present chapter)
q Elements of answer Introduction – New technologies and knowledge so dominate our lives that one does speak about the “knowledge economy”. – The knowledge economy is a force for good in the welfare of mankind. – Several theories analyse the changes our societies have experienced in this respect in the past decades. e
e
Three theories of the knowledge economy
1. Robert Reich and the world economy. a. New means of transport/communication have abolished distances. b. This leads to a ”flat world“. c. A new form of organisation appears: hierarchies are out, networks are in. 2. Jeremy Rifkin.. a. Formerly, the world was based on ownership. b. Today, new technologies have transformed the way economies and societies work:. i. Markets have become networks. ii. Trade in goods has been replaced by trade in services. iii. Salespeople have turned themselves into dealers. iv. Buyers have become users. v. Ownership has been replaced by leasing. 3. Cognitive capitalism. – The ultimate step in capitalism? – Knowledge economy makes full decentralisation possible. – Whereas, in the past decades, industrialisation meant a concentration of capital in factories, of labour in urban areas. – No centre anymore, but growing fragmentation of production process. Conclusion – Towards a new division of labour, based on knowledge. – Knowledge based economies keep in house those steps of production which add the most value to products and services. – Nike, the best example of this trend, concentrates on R&D and marketing and off shores the rest to developing countries. e
170
