The History of the Concept of

Copyright

Prepared by Asherry Magalla

Digitally signed by Asherry Magalla
DN: cn=Asherry Magalla gn=Asherry Magalla
c=Tanzania, United Republic Of l=TZ
[email protected]
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location: Dar Es Salaam-Tanzania
Date: 2015-10-20 17:43+03:00


LL.B Degree Holder at the University of Iringa (Formerly known as
Tumaini University Iringa University College) 2009-2012, Masters
Holder in Information, Communication and Technology Law at the
University of Iringa 2012-2013. Member of Non-Governmental
Organization NOLESA (The Noble Legal and Social Organization
(Association)). Articles and Legal Papers Author at academicians
website www.academia.edu, and
http://www.researchgate.net,
http://www.researchgate.net/ Consultant on legal issues of ICT.
Contact details, email, [email protected]

1
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Copyright © 2015 Asherry Magalla. All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any
information storage and retrieval system, without
permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how
to seek permission, further information about the
Publisher’s permissions and other arrangements can be
obtained through his email, [email protected]
This paper and the individual contributions contained in
it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other
than as may be noted herein).

2
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Abstract.

The history of something, gives the reader a wide

knowledge of what happened in the past, what is

currently happening and manage to anticipate the

future from the past and present incidents.

Tracing back the history of copyright worldwide is not

an easy task. This is simply because one has to find

conclusive and supportive documents to develop the

basis of originality.

Once Balzac said that;

“Writing is easy…… all you have to do is to

think, till the drops of blood appear on your

forehead”.

This is true because in this work it has been just the

religious concept of copyright protection which laid

3
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
down the background of copyright. Looking at the

basis of God’s Commandments as stipulated but holy

Books such as the Bible and Quran.

Then the history of copyright was traced back from

European Countries, such as Britain, Rome, Greek and

France through looking at various statutes composing

copyright protection.

America history of copyright protection followed by the

African history of copyright protection.

Since the author is a Tanzanian, the origin of the legal

basis of copyright protection is important.

The last parts are international copyright protection

and the first recorded copyright case.

4
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
1.1 The Exhaustive History of Copyright.

“Everything changes continually. What is history,

indeed, but a record of change?”

Jawaharlal Nehru.1

If you don’t like history you can ignore this session.

Everything it discussed happened in the past, and

some of the legislations mentioned in this session have

all been repealed. But some readers find history helps

them understand the present and many believe it is

difficult to plan for the future without knowing what

happened in the past. This session is written for them.

Copyright is a property right which subsists (exists) in the

various ’ works’, for example literary works, artistic

1 Vakul Sharma, Information Technology-Law and Practice, 3rd

Edition (New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co.Pvt. Ltd., 2011),
p.343

5
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
works, musical works, sound recordings, films and

broadcasts.2 It is a legal concept, enacted by most

governments, giving the creator of an original work

exclusive rights to it, usually for a limited time.3

When asking people about the nature of copyright,

many will verify Statute of Anne as its foundation.

However, the concept of copyright as a principle

existed earlier before that.

Ordinary and ancient people, often without realising it,

have always produced work that copyright protects. In

the past this work took the form of personal or business

2 David I. Bainbridge, Intellectual Property, Seventh Edition,

Pearson Longman, Ashford Colour Press Ltd, Gosport, 2009,, p.5
and 31.
3 World Intellectual Property Organisation. "Understanding
Copyright and Related Rights". WIPO. pp. 6–7. Retrieved January
26, 2013

6
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
letters, school or college essays and artwork or

photographs.4

Dating back almost to the beginnings of civilization

there have been those eager to profit from the work of

others (ne alieni collision Fructus laborum et vigiliarum

serum).5 In ancient times, the idea that the author of a

work of literature had economic rights to control the

dissemination and copying was not particularly well

established, and yet those who falsely claimed a work

were considered contemptible.6

1.1.1 The Religion Concept of Copyright Protection.

“You shall not covet your neighbour‟s house.

You shall not covet your neighbour‟s wife, or

4 Julien Hofman (2009), Introducing Copyright: A Plain Language

Guide to Copyright in the 21st Century, Vancouver:
Commonwealth of Learning, p. xi.
5 The Latin maxim which refers to those who reap the fruits of his

labours.
6 David I. Bainbridge, Intellectual Property, Seventh Edition,

Pearson Longman, Ashford Colour Press Ltd, Gosport, 2009, p.33.

7
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
 his manservant or maidservant, his ox or

donkey, or anything that belongs to your

neighbour”.7

“You shall not steal”.8

This is one among the Ten Commandments given

to Moses as tablets by the Almighty on Mount

Sinai. Covet as Bible Scholar Dr. Joel Hoffman

argues that is a mistranslation and the origin

Hebrew means “take”.

The command against coveting and stealing is

seen as natural consequences of the command to

“love your neighbour as yourself”. The prohibition

against desiring forbidden things is also seen as a

moral imperative for the individual to exercise

7 Exodus 20:17 (NIV)

8 Ibid.

8
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
control over the thoughts of his mind and the

desires of his heart.

How does this relate to copyright protection?

Covet as the original Hebrew means “take”,

hence one shall not take another property, and as

the fact that the product of intellect is a property

which inter alia copyright is within, and then the

act of taking author’s work is against the 10th

God’s Commandments which protect one’s

property from being deprived or taken by another

person.

Many Muslims publishers, software publishers,

CD/DVD producers as well as quite a few

individual Muslims violate copyright and

intellectual property laws by copying books, CDs,

DVDs, videos, logos, designs, computer programs,

9
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
at will, thinking that there is not against Islam. Such

violation of copyright and intellectual laws is

against Islam.9

In Islamic concern of copyright, Academy of

Islamic Fiqh issued a decision in 1405 A.H. That’s

reserved rights of authorship and invention. In other

words, all rights of such works are reserved by their

owners.10

The two concepts of covet and steal apply to

almost every religion, whether Islam, Christianity,

Buddhism and others.

9 Professor Rafik Beekun (2008), Forbids the Violation of Copyrights

Laws Regarding Intellectual property, the Islamic Workplace,
available at http://theislamicworkplace.com/2008/09/03/islam-
forbids-theviolation-copyright-laws-and-laws-regarding-
intellectual-property/.
10 Ibid.

10
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
1.1.2 Copyright Protection in Europe.

The nature and origin of copyright law in most of

the European Countries are the results of the efforts

made by the church and government to regulate

and control the output of printers.11

1.1.2.1 Copyright Protection in Ancient Greece and

Rome.

Several lines in the genealogy of copyright have been

traced to the fifteenth century in Venice, the home of

the first printing privileges.12 Sir Thomas (1581) once

state,

“In Venice, as I heard, and in many places

beyond the sea, they reward and cherish

11 Macqueen, Hector L, Charlotte W, Graeme T L, (2007),

Contemporary Intellectual Property : Law and Policy. Oxford
University Press p.34.
12 D, Ronan K, Martin and B, Lionel, Privileges and Property, Essay

on the History of Copyright, Cambridge Open Book Publishers,

2010 page 21.

11
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
 every man that brings in any new art or

mystery whereby the people may be set to

work”.13

People were illiterate and only privileged members of

society had access to these manuscripts. Scholars and

teachers of Ancient Greece and the Roman Empire

were the first to be concerned about being recognized

as the authors of their works, but they did not have any

economic rights because the teachers' emphasis on

moral rights.14

In Greek society, during the sixth century B.C.E., there

emerged the notion of the individual self, including

personal ideals, ambition, and creativity. The individual

self is important in copyright because it distinguishes the

13Sir Thomas Smyth, Discourse on the Common Weal of this Realm

of England (1581)
14 David I. Bainbridge, Intellectual Property, Seventh Edition,

Pearson Longman, Ashford Colour Press Ltd, Gosport, 2009, p.33.

12
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
creativity produced by the individual from the rest of

the society. In ancient Jewish Talmudic law there can

be found recognition of the moral rights of the author

and economic or property right of an author.15

From 1486 to1492 onwards the republic of Venice

started to grant privilege to books “Rerum venetarum

ab urbe condita opus’ of Marcus Antonius Coccius

Sabellicus”.16

In the year of 1501, as the fact that there was more

rapid and widespread circulation of ideas and

information in Rome, Pope Alexander VI issued a bull to

15 Ploman, Edward W., and L. Clark Hamilton, (1980) Copyright:

Intellectual Property in the Information Age: London: Routledge &
Keagan Paul.pp 5-7.
16 Armstrong, Elizabeth (1990). Before Copyright: the French Book-

Privilege System 1498-1526, Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, p.6.

13
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
restrict the printing of unlicenced books and for the first

time after 48 years a list of restricted books was issued.17

In contrast to modern copyright, early privileges were

conceived as a form of municipal favour, and an

exception to the law rather than the recognition of the

author’s inherent rights. Such privilege took various

forms such as printing privileges bestowing the

publishers or authors with the exclusive rights to print

and sell the work.18

1.1.2.2 Copyright Protection in Ancient France.

The history of copyright in France is not different from

other European countries. However French copyright

developed differently from British copyright. At first royal

grants regulated publishers in much the same way as

17 De Sola Pool, Ithiel (1983), Technologies of freedom, Harvard

University Press .pp.14.
18Ibid.

14
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
the letters patents regulated British publishers. But

French law attached more value to the creative

contribution of the author than did English law.19

It was about 18th Century whereby the right of an

author was used instead of copyright. The French

copyright law is expressed in the Code de propriete

intellectuelle, which implements the European

Copyright Law (directives). The French Copyright law

protected;

1. Proprietary Rights (Droit patrimoniaux).20

2. Moral Rights (Droits moraux)21

19 Julien Hofman (2009), Introducing Copyright: A Plain Language

Guide to Copyright in the 21st Century, Vancouver:
Commonwealth of Learning, p.7.
20 Proprietary rights allow an author to profit from a work either by

exploiting it or by selling the right to exploit it. As with copyright,

proprietary rights end after a period that, in France, is now 70 years
after the death of the author
21Moral rights, on the other hand, are perpetual. Moral rights are

the right to be recognised as author, the right to have a work kept

intact and the right not to have the work used in a way that would
lessen the author’s reputation.

15
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
In 1223 the Statute of the University of Paris legalized

duplication of texts for the use within the university, and

payment was made for the annotation and

proofreading of such texts.22

Like any other European countries, all books were

needed to be approved by official censors; authors

and publishers had to obtain a royal privilege before

the book is published. There was a national debate

over the Royal Council decision to award the royal

privilege to the heirs of an author rather than the

author’s publishers which seemed to be nature of

literary property similar to that of Britain.23

The privilege of copyright in France was referred to the

publication of the author’s works rather than the author

22 David I. Bainbridge (2009), Intellectual Property, Seventh Edition,

Pearson Longman, Ashford Colour Press Ltd, Gasport, p 33.
23 Yu, Peter K (2007), Intellectual property and Information Wealth:

Copyright and related Rights, Greenwood publishing Group,

Pp.141-142.

16
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
rights per se. The first privilege was given by Henri II in

1551 to Guillaume Morlay.24 These privileges were given

to specific editors and for a very short time, 3 years and

then the work would turn to public domain.25 However,

the authors were not mentioned in the Moulins

ordinance in 1566, which is believed to be the first law

imposed to librarians and editors to request printing

patent.

Various royal decree was passed to reform Royal

privileges, one being setting the duration of the

copyright protection for 10 years or the life of the

author, and if the author dies his heirs would enjoy the

exclusive rights, but after it was sold to the publisher,

the right would only last for a specified period of time.26

24 Anne Latournerie, Petite histoire des batailles du droit d’auteur,

Multitudes n°5, May 2001.
25 Ibid.
26 Ibid.

17
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
The problem of the Decree was that, it prohibited the

renewal of the work privileges, thus when the privileges

expired, the author’s work existed in the public domain

and anyone can have the permission to sell, copy or

distribute the work.27

The French Revolution28, brought dispute over the

exclusive right to the public performance of all

dramatic works given to comedy-Française, thus

privileges were abolished in 1791.

A new law was passed in 1793 in which the authors,

composers, and artists were given exclusive right to sell

and distribute their works. It further extends the right to

their heirs and assign for 10 years after the author’s

death. Because of the importance of protecting

27 Yu, Peter K (2007), Intellectual property and Information Wealth:

Copyright and related Rights, Greenwood publishing Group,
Pp.141-142.
28 1789-1799, Revolution Française was a period of radical social

and political upheaval in France that had a lasting impact on

French history and more broadly throughout Europe.

18
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
copyright, the National Assembly placed this law firmly

on a natural right footing, calling it “Declaration of the

Rights of Genius”29 and so entails the famous

Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in

1789.30However, the Act did not mention the rights of

authors.31

1.1.2.3 Copyright Protection in Ancient England.

According to Locke32, each individual is born with the

natural right to protect his or her own life, liberty, and

property. Every person has a right to be compensated

29 In 1791, Abbé Sieyès, one of the drafters of this French

Declaration, produced a Declaration of the Rights of Genius. But it
was only in 1793, after agitation by authors and playwrights, that
the National Convention passed copyright legislation. This
legislation is sometimes known as the Chénier Act after the poet
and politician, Marie-Joseph Chénier, who proposed it.
30 Yu, Peter K (2007), Intellectual property and Information Wealth:
Copyright and related Rights, Greenwood publishing Group,
Pp.141-142.
31Julien Hofman (2009), Introducing Copyright: A Plain Language

Guide to Copyright in the 21st Century, Vancouver:

Commonwealth of Learning, pp.7.
32 The English Philosopher and Politician

19
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
for wrongful injury to their own life, liberty, or property

which has been caused by other individuals.33

When an artist or writer creates his or her work, using a

lot of time and effort into their end product. Whether

copyright is over a tangible or intangible good, if effort

and time is put into its production, it technically is one’s

“property” according to Locke. By just taking this into

consideration, one would come to believe that Locke

would be in favour of copyright. Authors and artists

have a right to protect their property and be

compensated if others wrongfully “steal” their

property.34

As a legal concept, its origins in Britain were from a

reaction to printers' monopolies at the beginning of

33 Paul Torremans “Copyright law: a handbook of contemporary

research”, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2007 pg 136
34 Snradin (2011), Copy-Right or Copy-Wrong: Would Locke

Support Copyright?

20
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
15th to 18th century. Gutenberg invented movable

type, first used in 1455, and Caxton developed the

printing press and published Chaucer’s Canterbury

Tales, in 1478, the first bestseller. Movable type made it

economically viable to print books, and the idea

spread rapidly. By 1501 printing presses were operating

in about 280 cities in Europe.35

Copying of a manuscript was a painstakingly slow

process done mainly by monks and was limited to

copying religious works for orders and the royal courts

of Europe.36

In 1476 William Caxton introduces printing press in

London, through which the modern concept of

copyright was commenced. Books were copied by

35 Julien Hofman (2009), Introducing Copyright: A Plain Language

Guide to Copyright in the 21st Century, Vancouver:
Commonwealth of Learning, p. 2.
36 History of copyright, http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-
about/c-history.htm, Reviewed 30 January 2009.

21
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
hands and sold by stationers in the bigger cities in

Britain. In 1403, stationers in the City of London formed

a professional body, which resulted adoption of new

printing technology. The British Crown through letter

patentesgave the publisher exclusive right to publish

the work.37

By an Act of 1529 Henry VII, set up a system of privileges

and printing came to be controlled by the Stationers’

Company with the backing of the infamous Court of

Star Chamber. The Stationers’ Company had powers to

register members, regulates publishing, impose fines,

award damages, and confiscate infringing copies.38

37Forinstance, the patents the Oxford and Cambridge University

Presses have to print the Authorised Version of the Bible are
examples of these patents.
38 David I. Bainbridge, Intellectual Property, Seventh Edition,

Pearson Longman, Ashford Color Press Ltd, Gosport, 2009,p. 34

22
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
After the lapse of this system, common law copyright

was enforced by the Court of Common Pleas.39

The Royal Charter was established by King Philip and

Queen Mary in 1557 given to the stationers. The aim of

establishing the charter was “to make due provision for

the protection of their loyal subjects against divers

Books, Pamphlets and Broadsheets which have gravely

endangered both the spiritual welfare of the people

and the peace of this realm.40

Charles II of England was concerned by the

unregulated copying of books and passed the

Licensing of the Press Act 1662 by Act of Parliament.

The Act tightened the censorship the charter of Philip

and Mary had introduced. For example, it states that

Ibid.
39

Julien Hofman (2009), Introducing Copyright: A Plain Language

40

Guide to Copyright in the 21st Century, Vancouver:

Commonwealth of Learning, p. 2.

23
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
once a stationer had registered a copy of a work in the

register of the Stationers’ Company, no other stationer

was allowed to publish that work.41

The two parliaments of England and Scotland were

united and created an Anglo-Scottish Union. This new

parliament changed the laws in both countries and an

important early piece of legislation was the Copyright

act of 1709, also known as the Statute of Anne, called

after Queen Anne.42

The Statute of Anne 1710 the first real Copyright Act,

gave individual rights of the artist. It began, "Whereas

Printers, Booksellers, and other Persons, have of late

frequently taken the Liberty of printing... Books, and

41Julien Hofman (2009), Introducing Copyright: A Plain Language

Guide to Copyright in the 21st Century, Vancouver:
Commonwealth of Learning, p. 2.
42 Macqueen, Hector L, Charlotte W, Graeme T L, (2007),

Contemporary Intellectual Property: Law and Policy. Oxford

University Press Pp.34.

24
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
other Writings, without the Consent of the Authors... to

their very great Detriment, and too often to the Ruin of

them and their Families:" 43A right to benefit financially

from the work is articulated, and court rulings and

legislation have recognized a right to control the work,

such as ensuring that the integrity of it is preserved.44

The Statute of Anne also required the printer to deposit

copies of every book printed in nine libraries: four in

England and five in Scotland. The Act allowed for

importing books printed overseas, provided these were

in Greek or Latin or a foreign language. The Act also set

out a procedure for keeping the price of books

reasonably.45

43 Ronan, Deazley (2006). Rethinking copyright: history, theory,

language. Edward Elgar Publishing, p. 13.
44 http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright.
45 Julien Hofman (2009), Introducing Copyright: A Plain Language

Guide to Copyright in the 21st Century, Vancouver:

Commonwealth of Learning, p.4.

25
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
It was not particularly well drafted therefore; it took

years for the courts and further legislation to settle the

meaning of some of its provisions. It took time to

convince the stationers that the Act had abolished

what they called “common law copyright”. The

drafters did not find a word to express what we now

mean by “copyright”. It sometimes uses “copies” in this

sense. It also speaks of “property” in a book and of “the

proprietors” of the book. The first recorded use of the

word “copyright”, according to the Oxford English

Dictionary, was in the House of Lords some years later,

in 1735.46

The stationers and their printing monopoly rights were

neither granted by the act nor did it bring about a

great change in the way the publishing industry

worked. To make a success of publishing a book it was

46 Ibid.

26
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
necessary to invest capital in having copies of the book

printed. It was also necessary to persuade booksellers

to sell it. If the book did not sell, then the capital

invested in print it would be lost. This meant, as the

Statute of Anne envisaged would happen, that most

authors could only get their works published by selling

the copyright in their works to a publisher or a group of

publishers.47

The good thing about the Act, it puts authors in a

stronger position when it came to bargaining with

publishers. Some authors, such as Pope himself,

understood the new law and used the rights the Act

gave them to ensure they got a share in the rewards of

their writing. Unknown or less astute authors, no doubt,

would have had to settle for less favourable terms.

47 Ibid.

27
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
It was when the artist William Hogarth found that

printers were selling his engravings without his

permission, his friends got Parliament to pass what is

known as the Engravers Copyright Act of 1734. From

that moment copyright came to be seen as applying

to “literary and artistic” works. Before that, it was only

referred to literary works.48

In 1911 the Act known as the Imperial Copyright Act

was applied across the British Empire. It rationalised the

law on copyright which had previously been set out in

many different statutes as well as previously been a

part of the common law. The latest version of the Berne

Julien Hofman (2009), Introducing Copyright: A Plain Language

48

Guide to Copyright in the 21st Century, Vancouver:

Commonwealth of Learning, p.5.

28
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Convention was ratified by this Act which came into

force on 1 July 1912.49

Even various Artists during the two World Wars, were

encouraged to make songs which inspired the wars.

Their works' copyrights were assigned to the crown and

when the wars ended, the works were distributed to

galleries and museums in the United Kingdom and the

Commonwealth.50

BBC v Wireless League Gazette Publishing:51 In 1926, the

BBC sued for infringement of its rights in the listings of

radio programmes in the Radio Times. The Wireless

League Gazette argued that the contents of the Radio

Times where Crown copyright, but the court held that

they were copyright of the BBC. Although the BBC was

49 Enrolled statute (1&2 Geo 5 c46) in C 65/6288, see s18. Not freely
available online.
50 STAT 14/138 - There is a complete list of Second World War

recipient institutions and works in T 162/744, file E40396/2.

51 [1926] LR Ch 433.

29
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
licensed to broadcast by the Postmaster General it was

not operating under the direction or control of the

Crown.52

The Copyright Act of 1956 updated the Copyright Act

of 1911. The definition of Crown copyright was

narrowed so that it applied to works first published by

the Crown, not to all works published by the Crown

regardless of whether they had previously been

published by someone else.53

In 1977 a Whitford Committee report signified the

importance of updating the 1956 Copyright Act. Mr.

Justice Whitford, a High Court judge who had handled

52 Report published in the 1926 volume of Chancery cases in the

Law Reports Series at page 433.
53 available at:
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1956/74/section/39/enacted

30
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
many prominent copyright cases, was asked to make

recommendations. In his report was that,

“The definition of crown copyright was flawed

and that in any case there was no need for

special provision for the crown: it could have

protected in the same way as any other

employer”.

Only the first part of this conclusion was adopted in the

subsequent legislation.54

This was evidenced in the case Ironside v Attorney

General:55 In 1971 the Crown had commissioned

designs for the new decimal coinage from Ironside. The

Royal Mint then issued not only circulating currency but

also proof sets and Ironside sued on the basis that the

proof sets were unlicensed. The court held that the

54 Available at paragraph 600 of the Report.

55 [1988] RPC 197.

31
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
designs were Crown copyright not only because they

had been commissioned but also because the designs

were first published in newspapers at the end of an

embargo. The commissioners and the publication were

both held to be under the direction or control of the

Crown.56

In 1988, the Copyright Designs and Patents Act

introduced to take account of the development of

computing. The Crown copyright definition was more

precise, closer to the provision for other employers and

gave no automatic right to works published by the

Crown. It was now applied to the works created by Her

Majesty or by an officer or servant of the Crown57 in the

course of his duties. The Act still exists and in use

56 Published in the 1988 Volume of the Reports of Patents Cases

(itself a Crown Copyright Series) at page 197.
57 Civil workers, member of armed forces, judges, police officers

and government ministers.

32
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
currently with some amendments as science and

technology develop, and as the public demands.

In the case of HRH the Prince of Wales v Associated

Newspapers58 The Daily Mail published extracts from

the personal journals of the Prince of Wales, written

while he was representing the Queen at the handover

of Hong Kong to China. The Daily Mail asserted that the

journals were Crown copyright because the Prince was

standing in for the Queen. The court held that the

definition of Crown copyright applied to Her Majesty

herself but not to someone representing her unless he

or she was an officer or servant of the Crown. The

Prince was neither the Queen nor one of her officers or

servants.59

58[2007] 2 All ER 139, [2006] ECDR 224.

59 Court of Appeal judgment published in volume 2 of 2007 All
England Law Reports at page 139, earlier High Court judgment

33
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
White Paper, The Future Management of Crown

copyright was established in 1999 in which some types

of Crown copyright work were to be made freely

available for re-use under a waiver of copyright,

notably legislation and unpublished public records.

Standardised licensing terms for the use of most other

Crown material were to be offered.

In the aspect of computing development, in Hoffman

v Drug Abuse Resistance Education60: The Department

of Health published a document on its website that was

in privately-owned copyright, but failed to indicate this.

DARE reproduced the document, assuming that it must

be Crown copyright, and so infringed.

published in 2006 volume of European Copyright and Design

Reports at page 244.
60 (UK) (DARE), 2012.

34
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
In HMSO and Ordnance Survey v Green Amps61, Green

Amps employed a person who had use of a student’s

password that gave access to some of the mapping of

Ordnance Survey under a license to the student’s

university. It used this access to acquire a copy of the

entire set of Digimap data and proposed to exploit it

commercially in the production and sale of energy

from wind turbines. OS secured an injunction against

Green Amps.

1.1.3 Copyright Protection in the United States of

America.

“I sincerely wish our legislature would come at

once to the line of right and justice on this

subject, and pass a new Act, the preamble to

which shall admit the principle that an author

has, by common law, or by natural justice, the

61 2007-2008

35
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
 sole and permanent right to make profits by

his own labours, and that his heirs and assigns,

shall enjoy the right, unclogged with

condition”.

Noah Webster.

It is believed by some authors that, the British Statute of

Anne was not used in the American Colonies. The

concept of copyright protection was not that

important due to the fact that the colonies economy

was largely agrarian therefore no priorities for copyright

protection, only three laws were passed in 1783 which

were limited to 5-7 years. That time the congress had

no authority to enact any laws relating to copyright

protection. However, due to the number of complaints

from various authors, it managed to pass a resolution

36
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
encouraging the states to secure and protect the

publisher and authors’ works for the time not limited to

14 years from their first date of publication, and to

secure to the said authors, if they shall survive the term

first mentioned.62

Three states enacted copyright statutes in 1783 prior to

the Continental Congress Resolution, and in the

subsequent three years, all of the remaining states

except Delaware passed copyright statutes. Seven of

the states followed the Statute of Anne and the

Continental Congress Resolution by providing two

fourteen year terms. The five remaining states granted

62Yu, Peter K (2007), Intellectual property and Information Wealth:

Copyright and related Rights, Greenwood publishing Group,
Pp.142.

37
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
copyright for a single term of fourteen years, twenty

and twenty one year, with no right of renewal.63

In 1787, James Madison of Virginia and Charles C.

Pinckney of South Carolina proposed a proposal that

would give the Congress the power to grant copyright

for a limited time. It is from this proposal whereby the

copyright clause of the United States Constitution is

originated.64

The development and the concept of copyright

became well known during the emergence of

American Constitution whereby Copyright Clause of

63 Yu, Peter K (2007), Intellectual property and Information Wealth:

Copyright and related Rights, Greenwood publishing Group,
Pp.143.
64 Donner, Irah (1992) Copyright Clause of the United States

Constitution: Why did the Framers include it with Unanimous

Approval? The American Journal of Legal History 36 (6): 361-378.

38
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
the United States Constitution 1787 authorized

copyright legislation:65

"To promote the Progress of Science and

useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to

Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to

their respective Writings and Discoveries."66

The Article describes the Constitutional basis of the

federal intellectual property protection especially

Clause 8.67

A right to profit from the work has been the

philosophical underpinning for much legislation

extending the duration of copyright, to the life of the

creator and beyond, to his heirs. The original length of

65 Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8.

66Ibid.
67Paul Goldstein (1999), Copyright, Patent, Trademark and Related
States Doctrines, Cases and Materials on the Law of Intellectual
Property, Revised Fourth Edition, New York: New York Foundation
Press, p.1.

39
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
copyright in the United States was 14 years, and it had

to be explicitly applied for. Author could apply for a

second 14-year monopoly grant.68

Even though, some authors proclaimed that, there was

no use of the British Statute of Anne in America colony,

George Washington signed the bill sent by the

Congress into their first federal copyright law. The

Copyright Act of 1790 copied almost verbatim from the

Statute of Anne. Statutory requirements were required

from the author to claim for the copyright protection,

and if not the work will fall under the public domain.

The Copyright Act of 1790 was amended in 1802 to

include engravings, etchings, prints, or pictures for only

a period of 14 years without extension.69

68 Ibid.
69Copyright Series Part 1- Early Copyright History (1787-1905),
available at http://www.sustainablediversity.com/?p=9

40
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
In Wheaton v. Peters70, it was held that, although the

author of unpublished work had a common law right to

control the first publication of that work, the author did

not have a common law right to control reproduction

following the first publication of the work.

In February 1831, the First Democratic President,

Andrew Jackson, signed and put into law what would

become historically known as the Copyright Act of

1831.71It was the first serious Act to revise the 1790 Act

to which America would never turn. The Act extends

the term of copyright protection to 28 years with the 14

years of renewal. Musical compositions were added to

the growing list of copyrightable material and

copyright could be extended past the death of the

70 33 U.S 8 Pet. 591 (1834)

71 The Noah Webster’s Act.

41
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
author of the widow or children of the author.72 In 1909

again Copyright Act was enacted establishing the term

of 28 years with another 28 years of renewal.

All of the above legislations did provide for the

protection of copyright under the dual system, which

means under both state protection73 and federal

protection.74

However, this was abolished after the enactment of the

Copyright act of 1976 which entails that;

“On and after January 1, 1978, all legal or

equitable rights that are equivalent to any of

the exclusive rights within the general scope

of copyright in works of authorship that come

72 Copyright Series Part 1- Early Copyright History (1787-1905),

available at http://www.sustainablediversity.com/?p=9
73 Which provide for the Common Law copyright protection for

unregistered works.
74 Which provided for the statutory protection of copyright for

registered works.

42
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
 within the subject matter of copyright are

governed exclusively by this title”.

Thereafter, no person is entitled to any such right or

equivalent right in any such work under the

common law or statutes of any state.

In the United States, the states cannot protect

subject matter that comes within the Congress

copyright-patent power but fails to qualify for

federal copyright or patent protection, because it

is not the subject matter that the Federal Statute

protects, because it does not meet the qualitative

standards.75

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 came

with the intention of fighting against copyright

75 See Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co. Supreme Court of the
United States,1964.376 U.S. 225, 84 S.Ct.784 11L.Ed 661, 140 U.S.P.Q.
524 and in Compco Corp. v. Day-Brite Lighting Inc, Supreme Court
of the United States,1964.376 U.S.234, 84 S.Ct.799,11 L.Ed 669, 140,
U.S.P.Q.531.

43
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
infringement in the digital era. The Act makes a

crime to circumvent anti-piracy measures built into

commercial software, and it outlaws the

manufacture, sale, or distribution of code-cracking

device used to copy software illegally. It does,

however, allow the cracking of copyright-

protection devices in certain cases (encryption

research, product interoperability tests and

security testing).76

It limits online service providers from copyright-

infringement liability for simply transmitting

information over the internet, but expects service

76

http://www.bampfa.berkeley.edu/copyright_project/copyritetool
box/History_copyright.php.

44
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
providers to remove material from those users’

websites that appear to infringe copyright.77

It limits liability of nonprofit institutions of higher

education, when they serve as an online service

provider, and in certain situations, for copyright

infringement by faculty of students.78

Therefore in the United States of America,

copyright is protected from the traditional or

conventional means to digital or nonconventional

means.

77 Title II of the act which is dealing with the Online Copyright

Infringement Liability Limitation.
78 Ibid.

45
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
1.1.4 Copyright Protection in Ancient African

Societies.

There is no evidence that during the Ancient African

Societies there was copyright protection. This is simply

because most of the African events were not put into

records compared with the Europeans, Americans and

Asians, where by their events were recorded in a fixed

form so as they act as the evidence as to the existence

of an ancient, such as copyright laws.

While the European perception of literature generally

refers to written letters, the African concept includes

oral literature (oriterature “ureter”, in the term coined

by Ugandan scholar Pio Zirimu).79 In Africa could also

George, Joseph, (1996), “African literature,”, in Gordon and

79

Gordon, Understanding Contemporary Africa ch. 12,p. 303

46
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
imply an artistic control or use of words for the sake art

alone.80

Even though, there is evidence to prove the existence

of Ancient African Arts and Literary Works presence in

crave, rocks oral literature such as Swahili literature

being Utendi WA Tambuka or “The Story of Tambuka”,

Epic of Sundiata in Mali and Epic of Dinga from old

Ghana Empire81 and some in the papers and the role

of Egypt, Timbuktu and Ethiopia in mathematical

calculation, reading and writing knowledge82 , still there

is no proven to the existence of copyright protection of

those inventions and creations.

Legally, copyright protection in most of the Africa

Societies began as soon as the existence of Colonialists

80 Ibid
81 “African literature – MSN Encarta”. Archived from the original on
2009 – 10 – 31
82 Matthias Schulz Anwen Roberts (2008). “The Rush to save

Timbuktu‟s Crumbling Manuscripts”

47
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
in Africa who were believed to bring civilization in

Africa including formal education in which African

literature and artistic works were protected by the

colonialists, even though Africans were not well benefits

from their labour, efforts and judgment of their works.

For instance, in 1911, the first African novel written in

English, Ethiopia Unbound: Studies in Race

Emancipation, written by Joseph Ephraim Casely

Hayford of the Gold Coast (Ghana) was published.83

Herbert Isaac Ernest Dhlomo of South Africa published

the first English – language African play, The Girl Killed

to Save: Nogqawuse the Liberator in 1935.

This would not have been happening if African

Societies had records in fixed form to prove various

activities for copyright protection occurred before the

83Stephanie Newell (2002), Literary Culture in Colonial Ghana:

„How to Play the Game of life‟, Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana
University Press, p. 135, ch 7, “Ethical Fiction: J.E. Casely Hayford’s
Ethiopia Unbound”

48
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
coming of the colonialists, but it is just a hearsay that

we have.

This would not have been happening if African

Societies had records in fixed form to prove various

activities for copyright protection occurred before the

coming of the colonialists, but it is just a hearsay that

we have.

Asked yourself why Christopher Okigbo was killed in

battle for Biafra against the Nigerian movement of the

1960s’ civil war; Mongane Wally Serote was detained

under South Africa’s Terrorism Act No 83 of 1967

between 1969 and 1970. It is simply because their

literature works inspired the public over the real

situation that happened to their country and since the

colonial government recognizes their works as the

49
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
original author, hence protected, that is why they

faced such incidence.

1.1.5 Copyright Protection in Tanzania (Tanganyika by

then).

Copyright protection in most of the Africa Societies

began as soon as the existence of Colonialists in Africa

who were believed to bring civilization in Africa

including formal education in which African literature

and artistic works were protected by the colonialists,

even though Africans were not well benefits from their

labour, efforts and judgment of their works.

However, there was an existence of literary and artistic

works in Africa. The problem is there is no written

evidence to prove the protection of such works by

African societies.

50
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
In order to understand the concept of copyright

protection in Tanzania (Tanganyika by then), it is for the

best to look at the nature of the legal systems during

the Colonial era which automatically resulted in the

current copyright protection laws, and before looking

to the nature of the Colonial Legal System, the aims of

Colonialists are important.

Cecil Rhodes outlined the main purpose of the colonial

economy, which was pioneered by early imperial

companies, as follows:84

“We must find new lands from which we can

easily obtain raw materials and at the same

time exploit the cheap slave labour that is

available from the natives of the colonies. The

colonies would also provide a dumping

84As quoted in “ Development as Enclosure: The Establishment of a

Global Economy: The Ecologist 22 No.4 (1992) pp. 31-47)

51
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
 ground for surplus Goods produced in our

factories.”85

1.1.5.1 Germany Mandate: AD 1890-1919.

During the Germany colonial rule the administration of

justice was basically racial; there were two systems, one

for natives and another for non-natives. The

adjudication at this time was made by the governor

and other administrative Officers. The law applicable in

matters relating to Native was actually vague.86

The Germans left behind a Three-tier Court System; one

for Europeans, a second under the Local

Authorities and the Military Commanders for the

Natives in effectively occupied areas and lastly, the

Traditional Judicial Institutions in areas without effective

German Control. The German Colonial Administration

85 Rogate R. Mshana, the Economic Impacts of German Colonial

Rule and the Question of Reparation, 2001.
86 Available at http://www.judiciary.go.tz, extracted 3rd April 2013.

52
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
successfully attempted to impose upon the Natives a

Pan-Territorial Legal System for the first time in the area

though the system was strange to them, discriminatory

and brutally applied by law enforcers.87 Through

looking at this nature of the legal system, copyright

protection was there but with racial bias.

1.1.5.2 British Mandate: AD 1919-1962

After the end of the war the treaty of Versailles, in 1919,

grants Britain a League of Nations mandate to govern

the former German East Africa which now acquires a

new name, Tanganyika. During the British Colonial Era,

the British introduced two separate structures of judicial

hierarchies and this was done through the Tanganyika

Order in Council.88

87 Ibid.
88 Tanganyika Order in Council of 1920.

53
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
British policy from the 1920s onwards was to encourage

indigenous African administration along traditional

lines, through local councils and courts. A legislative

council is also established in Dar Es Salaam, but African

members were not elected to this until after World War

II. By then local political development is an obligation

under the terms of UN trusteeship, in which Britain

places Tanganyika in 1947.89

Despite several amendments to the law, the

administration of justice during British rule never did

away with the racial discrimination.90

89

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid
=ad23
90 Magalla, A and Robert E. (2012), Independence of Judiciary

and Administration of Justice in Tanzania: A Critical Assessment of

Its Interpretation and Practical Application by the Courts in
Tanzania. A research thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of
academic requirement for the award of Bachelor of Laws (LL.B), at
Tumaini University Iringa University College. Retrieved April
available at

54
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Codification of copyright law came only with the

Copyright Act of 1911. This Act, also known as the

Imperial Copyright Act, applied in colonial territories

and was the model for most of the early copyright

legislation in Commonwealth countries.91

In 1966, after independence, there was a repealed of

the Copyright Ordinance Chapter 218 by Copyright

Act No. 61 of the same year which at the end resulted

in the enactment of the new Copyright Legislation in

1999 which it is still in operation currently.

http://www.academia.edu/3123220/THE_INDEPENDENCE_OF_JUDI
CIARY_IN_TANZANIA, at page 5-6.
91 Julien Hofman (2009), Introducing Copyright: A Plain Language

Guide to Copyright in the 21st Century, Vancouver:

Commonwealth of Learning, p.5.

55
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
1.1.6 The Rise of International Agreements for Copyright

Protection

As the result of the industrial revolution and the rapid

developments made in the fields of science,

technology, and culture, new kinds of property apart

from the traditional came into existence. The concept

has undergone a sea change especially after the

Second World War.

They received a great attention due to their unique

features and possibility of their violation easily. It is

because of their unique characteristics, international

and big corporation saw the necessity of protecting

them.92 To control market power, measures that seek to

counteract abuses of market power by heaviest

companies were inevitable. Otherwise, liberalization

G.B. Reddy, Intellectual Property Rights and the Law, 1st Edition,
92

Gogia Law Publications, Navya Printers 2000 p.2.

56
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
might simply end in laissez faire.93 Intellectual property is

the umbrella phrase now used, but only since about

the 1970s. Before that it meant only copyright and the

like’s rights to cover all the various rights that may be

invoked to prevent imitations of various sorts.94

The Paris convention for the Protection of Industrial

Property, signed in Paris France, on March 20, 1883, was

one of the first intellectual property treaties. It

established a Union for the protection of industrial

property. The Convention is still in force as of 2013.

The Berne Convention95 first established recognition of

copyrights among sovereign nations, rather than

merely bilaterally. Under the Berne Convention,

93 Christopher Arup, The World Trade Organization Knowledge

Agreements, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, 2008, p.
14
94 Jacob R, Alexander D and Lindsay L, A Guide Book to

intellectual property, 5th Edition, London Sweet & Maxwell 2004, p.3
95 S. Ricketson, The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary

and Artistic Works:1886-1986 (London: Centre for Commercial Law

Studies, Queen Mary, 1987).

57
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
copyrights for creative works do not have to be

asserted or declared, as they are automatically in force

at creation: an author need not "register" or "apply for"

a copyright in countries adhering to the Berne

Convention. As the work is "fixed", author is

automatically entitled to all copyrights in the work, and

to any derivative works unless and until the author

explicitly disclaims them, or until the copyright expires.96

While the Berne Convention 1886 seems to be based

more on the protection of authors rights97 or literacy

and artistic works, the 1961 Rome Convention goes

further to protect neighbouring rights or entrepreneur

96 "Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic

Works Article 5". World Intellectual Property Organization. Retrieved
January 26, 2013
97 Droit de’ auteur which includes works created by authors such

as literary works that is to say books, music, art and firms (droit
voisins) including phonogram producers, performers and
broadcasters. However both Convention share same national
treatment.

58
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
works98. Initially the Berne Convention did not seem to

reflect the impact of digital technology until it was

modernized via other Conventions.

The impact of digital technology on copyrighted works

has been considered via Article 20 of the Berne

Convention99, the WIPO Copyright Treaty of 1996

appears to cope with digital technology as grant

exclusive rights to others, performers and producers in

making their copies available to the public by wire or

wireless means100. Thus the phrase “by wireless”

suggests the protection of IP rights in line with computer

technology.

98 Examples of these types of works include sound recordings,

cable programs, broadcasts and the typographical format of
published editions.
99 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic

Works, 1886-1986
100 Article 10 of the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty

1996.

59
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Universal Copyright Convention – ratified by the U.S. in

1954 and again in 1971, this treaty was developed by

UNESCO as an alternative to the Berne Convention.

Therefore the chronological historical development of

copyright protection falls under the following

legislations;101

Licensing Press Act 1662,102 Statute of Anne 1710103, The

Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property

of 1883, International Copyright Act 1886 and the Berne

Convention, Copyright Act 1911,104 Universal Copyright

Convention,105 Copyright Act 1956106; the Rome

101 History of copyright – http://www.ipo.gov.uk/type/copy/c-

about.htm...reviewed 30 January 2009
102 The issue of piracy brought bout an act to establish a register of

licensed books, along with the requirement to deposit a copy of

the book to be licensed.
103 Introduced the principle of a fixed term of protection.
104 This act brought provisions on copyright into one Act for the first

time by revising and repealing earlier Acts.

105 One of the principal international conventions protecting

copyright, it was adopted in Geneva in 1952.

60
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Convention of 1961107, Copyright Designs and Patent

Act 1988108 and lastly World Intellectual Property

Organization Copyright Treaty of 1996 was

established109, in which in Africa, The African Regional

Intellectual property Organization (ARIPO), formerly

African Regional Industrial Property Organization was

formed.110

Currently, the President of the United Republic of

Tanzania, Honorable Dr. Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete has

signed the new law THE CYBERCRIMES ACT, 2015, in

February 20.

106 This Act acknowledged further amendments to the Berne

Convention and the United Kingdom’s accessions to the Universal
Copyright Convention.
107 Which protects neighboring rights or entrepreneur works.
108 This is the UK’s current copyright act has been amended by EC

Directives and other legislation since it came into force.

109 With the aim to cope with the advancement of science and

technology.
110 Created in Lusaka, Zambia, on December 9, 1979 (Lusaka

Agreement), headquarters: Zimbabwe

61
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
This Act to a certain extent has tried to solve some

problems relating to protection of intellectual property

rights in digital environment.

For instance Section 3 of the Act111 has defined what

intellectual property rights mean state that;

"intellectual property rights"

means the rights accrued or

related to copyright, patent,

trade mark and any other

related matters;

Also the same section has tried to explain

the meaning of property as;

"Property" means property of

any kind, whether movable or

111 The Cybercrimes Act, 2015

62
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
 immovable, tangible or

intangible, and includes-

(a) Any currency either as a

legal tender in the United

Republic of

Tanzania or not;

(b) Information, including an

electronically produced

program or data or copy

thereof, human or computer-

readable data; or

(c) Any right or interest in

property.

Furthermore section 24 of the Act state

that;

63
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
 (1) A person shall not use a

computer system to violate

intellectual property rights

protected under any written

law.

(2) A person who contravenes

subsection (1) commits an

offence and in case the

infringement is on -

(a) non-commercial basis, is

liable to a fine of not less than

five million shillings or to

imprisonment for a term of not

less than three years or both;

or

(b) Commercial basis is liable

to a fine of not less than

64
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
 twenty million shillings or to

imprisonment for a term of not

less than five years or to both.

In this Act digital copyright infringement may be

claimed, but I still have some questions, what about

those international and regional treaties which the

country is not the member, for example the country has

not signed and ratified the Convention relating to the

distribution of program carrying signals transmitted by

the satellite of 1974.112This brings challenges especially

on the copyrighted materials which are transmitted

through satellites. If the Treaty is not signed or ratified

can the local legislation enable to solve the problem

which can be solve by such Treaty?

112 See Brussels Convention Relating to the Distribution of

Programme-Carrying Signals Transmitted by Satellite at
http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/text.jsp?file_id=283796-retrieved
on 21st July 2013.

65
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Also the Act does not discuss the concept of fair use

that means if it started to be operated (as the fact that

the Act it is not yet put into practice despite of the fact

that it has been already signed by the president) only

one right will be claimed digitally (private rights) and

leaving the other rights (public rights) hanging, thus

twisting the balance between the protection of both

public and private rights.

Despite of having this CYBERCRIMES ACT, 2015, still we

need to improve our other written laws such as

Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act, [Cap.218 R.E.

2002] so as to support these changes which have been

brought by this Act so as to strike a balance between

the protection of private rights and public right in

intellectual property rights particularly in copyright.

66
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
1.7 The First Recorded Copyright Case.

The first record of a copyright case was Finnian v

Columba113. Finnian possessed a new Psalter known as

a book of Psalms; Columbia copied it, intending to

keep his copy of the work. St. Finnian disputed his right

to have such copy, which at the end led to a Battle of

Cul Dreimhne in 561 AD, and many people died.

Columba was punished for it.114 The copy was

reclaimed, so the tradition relates, under the decision

of King Dermott, in the Halls of Tara: "To every cow her

calf, to every book its copy.115" The authenticity of the

tradition is questioned by other writers, but the phrase

gives the pith of the common law doctrine of literary

113567 A.D
114Bowker, R.R, Copyright: Its History and its Law, Houghton Mifflin,
(1912) p.9
115Graham D ,and Uma S (2013). Global Intellectual property Law,

Edward Elgar Publishing, p.64.

67
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
property and indicates that in those early centuries

there was a sense of copyright.

68
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Bibliography

Text Books

Armstrong, Elizabeth (1990). Before Copyright: the

French Book-Privilege System 1498-1526, Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge.

Bainbridge D, (2009) Intellectual Property, Seventh

Edition, Pearson Longman, Ashford Colour Press Ltd,

Gosport.

Bowker, R.R (1912), Copyright: Its History and its Law,

Houghton Mifflin.

Christopher Arup (2008), The World Trade Organization

Knowledge Agreements, Second Edition, Cambridge

University Press.

De Sola Pool, Ithiel (1983), Technologies of freedom,

Harvard University Press .pp.14.

69
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
D, Ronan K, Martin and B, Lionel (2010), Privileges and

Property, Essay on the History of Copyright, Cambridge

Open Book Publishers.

Eide A, and Krause C, Et al, (2001) Economic, Social

and Cultural Rights, Second Revised Edition, Martinus

Nijhoff Publishers.

Fishman, S. (2008) the copyright handbook: What every

writer needs to know. Berkeley, CA: Nolo.

George, Joseph, (1996), “African literature,”, in Gordon

and Gordon, Understanding Contemporary Africa.

Graham D, and Uma S (2013). Global Intellectual

property Law, Edward Elgar Publishing

G.B. Reddy (2000), Intellectual Property Rights and the

Law, 1st Edition, Gogia Law Publications, Navya Printers.

70
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Jacob R, Alexander D and Lindsay L (2004), A Guide

Book to intellectual property, 5th Edition, London Sweet

& Maxwell.

Julien Hofman (2009), Introducing Copyright: A Plain

Language Guide to Copyright in the 21st Century,

Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning.

Macqueen, Hector L, Charlotte W, Graeme T L, (2007),

Contemporary Intellectual Property: Law and Policy.

Oxford University Press

Matthias Schulz Anwen Roberts (2008). “The Rush to

save Timbuktu‟s Crumbling Manuscripts”

Patterson, (1968) Copyright in Historical Perspective,

Vanderbilt Univ. Press.

Paul Goldstein (1999), Copyright, Patent, Trademark

and Related States Doctrines, Cases and Materials on

71
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
the Law of Intellectual Property, Revised Fourth Edition,

New York: New York Foundation Press.

Ploman, Edward W., and L. Clark Hamilton, (1980)

Copyright: Intellectual Property in the Information Age:

London.

Ronan, Deazley, (2006) Rethinking copyright: history,

theory, language. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Sir Thomas Smyth (1581), Discourse of the Common

Weal of this Realm of England .

Sharma Vakul, (2011) Information Technology-Law and

Practice, 3rd Edition (New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing

Co. Pvt. Ltd.

S. Ricketson (1987), The Berne Convention for the

Protection of Literary and Artistic Works:1886-1986

(London: Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen

Mary, 1987).

72
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Stephanie Newell (2002), Literary Culture in Colonial

Ghana: „How to Play the Game of life‟, Bloomington,

Indiana: Indiana University Presses, Peter K (2007),

Intellectual property and Information Wealth: Copyright

and related Rights, Greenwood publishing Group.

Articles and Journals

Brian Pelanda (2011), “Declaration of Cultural

Independence: The Nationalistic Imperative Behind the

Passage of Early America Copyright Laws, 1783-1787”,

58 Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA 431

Donner, Irah (1992) Copyright Clause of the United

States Constitution: Why did the Framers include it with

Unanimous Approval? The American Journal of Legal

History.

Professor Rafik Beekun (2008), Forbids the Violation of

Copyrights Laws Regarding Intellectual property, the

73
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Islamic Workplace. Available at

http://theislamicworkplace.com/2008/09/03/islam-

forbids-theviolation-copyright-laws-and-laws-regarding-

intellectual-property/.

Rogate R. Mshana, the Economic Impacts of German

Colonial Rule and the Question of Reparation,

2001Electronic Sources

World Intellectual Property Organisation.

"Understanding Copyright and Related Rights". WIPO.

Pp. 6–7. Retrieved January 26, 2013

World Wide Web Sites

http://www.academia.edu/3123220/THE_INDEPENDEN

CE_OF_JUDICIARY_IN_TANZANIA, at page 5-6.

http://www.bampfa.berkeley.edu/copyright_project/c

opyritetoolbox/History_copyright.php.

74
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.as

p?historyid=ad23

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/type/copy/c-about.htm.

http://www.judiciary.go.tz

http://theislamicworkplace.com/2008/09/03/islam-

forbids-theviolation-copyright-laws-and-laws-regarding-

intellectual-property/.

Legal Documents

Case Laws

BBC v Wireless League Gazette Publishing [1926] LR Ch

433.

Compco Corp. v. Day-Brite Lighting Inc, Supreme Court

of the United States, 1964.376 U.S.234, 84 S.Ct.799, 11

L.Ed 669, 140, U.S.P.Q.531

Ironside v Attorney General: [1988] RPC 197.

75
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Finnian v Columba, 567 A.D

Hoffman v Drug Abuse Resistance Education, (UK)

(DARE), 2012.

HMSO and Ordnance Survey v Green Amps, 2007-2008

HRH the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers

[2007] 2 All ER 139, [2006] ECDR 244

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co. Supreme Court of

the United States, 1964.376 U.S. 225, 84 S.Ct.784 11L.Ed

661, 140 U.S.P.Q. 524

Statutes

The United States Constitution 1787

The Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act [CAP 218

R.E. 2002]

The Copyright Designs and Patent Act 1988.

76
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Tanganyika Order in Council of 1920.

The United States Copyright Act of 1976.

The United States No Electronic Theft Act of 1997.

International Sources

Treaties

The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and

Artistic Works, 1886-1986

The Statute of Anne 1710

The Universal Copyright Convention of 1952.

The WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty 1996

Academic Papers

Magalla, A and Robert E. (2012), Independence of

Judiciary and Administration of Justice in Tanzania: A

Critical Assessment of Its Interpretation and Practical

77
Magalla Jr. © 2015.
Application by the Courts in Tanzania. A research thesis

submitted in partial fulfilment of academic

requirements for the award of Bachelor of Laws (LL.B),

at Tumaini University Iringa University College. Retrieved

April available at

http://www.academia.edu/3123220/THE_INDEPENDEN

CE_OF_JUDICIARY_IN_TANZANIA, at page 5-6.

Author’s Particulars:

Name: Asherry Magalla.

Home Address: 8401, DSM-Tanzania.

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Phone No: +255716348882, +255687565680,

+255752140992

78
Magalla Jr. © 2015.