Lably
Skip to content

Censorship by copyright

Use of copyright to enact censorship

  • 12 min read
  • 3 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Copyright, Research and Fair use

The most common form of censorship by copyright concerns the abuse of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) either by copyright holders or by the service providers. The DMCA forces web hosts to be overly sensitive to claims of copyright infringement and act as de facto gatekeepers, infringing upon fair use as well as facilitating abuse in the form of bogus copyright claims.

Reasons

Strong-arm deterrence tactic

The use of censorship of copyright has been described as a legal "strong-arm" tactic (guerrilla litigation) aimed at creating deterrents for future copyright infringement by educating the public about the copyright. This tactic does not require a trial, as the threat of litigation against financially vulnerable violators can often be sufficient. Sometimes such activities are called strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP). This has also led to chilling effect, self-censorship or abuse from copyright trolls.

Censorship

The lack of consequences for perjury in DMCA claims encourages censorship. This has caused temporary takedowns of legitimate content that can be financially damaging to the legitimate copyright holder, who has no recourse for reimbursement. As a consequence, DMCA has enabled copyright owners to "censor academic discussions and online criticism". It has also been used by businesses to censor competition. It has also been used to censor investigative reporting, and suppress political speech. This includes the use of it by parties in non-democratic states, which use international law to remove content from international (Western) platforms like YouTube. Modern copyright has been described as "an attractive weapon to chill speech".

In the context of American legislation, censorship by copyright has been said to violate the First Amendment; such abuse of copyright is supposed to be limited by fair use, but fair use has been found to be difficult to enforce due to chilling effects of copyright litigation and disparity of power between copyright holders and those seeking permission to use a work. In particular, protections related to satirical use are seen as inadequate.

Censorship by copyright has also been linked to reducing innovation, creativity, and limiting artistic expression. A study involving visual artists and professionals in the visual arts sector revealed that one-third have either avoided or ceased work in their domain due to worries about copyright infringement. Additionally, over half of the editors and publishers surveyed have dropped or reduced the scope of their projects because of these worries. A 2005 survey of documentary makers in Canada found that 85% of them said copyright is more harmful than beneficial for their field and that it threatens their ability to produce content. Such concerns have also hindered museums and libraries from digitizing and sharing cultural and scientific materials, including works for whom no living copyright holder could be identified but which are protected by the law by default (orphan works).

Suppression of historical and religious texts

Copyright has also been used to restrict access to historical, religious, and esoteric texts, particularly by organizations that claim institutional ownership over works produced by their founders or members. Critics argue that when religious or fraternal organizations use copyright to limit distribution of philosophical, spiritual, or instructional texts — especially those written decades or centuries ago — the effect is censorship of cultural heritage rather than protection of commercial interests.

Notable examples include disputes over the literary estate of Aleister Crowley, where the Ordo Templi Orientis (OTO) has pursued copyright claims against publishers and distributors of Crowley's works, some of which were originally published in the early twentieth century. Similar disputes have arisen around texts from fraternal and initiatory organizations, where materials originally intended for educational use within the organization are restricted from broader scholarly or public access through copyright enforcement.

The tension between institutional copyright control and public access to historical religious texts has been cited as a factor in the growth of shadow libraries that specialize in esoteric and philosophical works, where communities of scholars and practitioners share texts they argue should be part of the public cultural commons.

Sign in to keep reading

2 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Social studies