The Motivation Paradox: Exploring Copyright’s Assumptions About Creativity and the Allocation of Creative Resources

Abstract

Copyright is instrumental in promoting the progress of science by encouraging authors and other creators to produce and disseminate creative works by granting them an exclusive property right over the creative resources they produce. However, only some copyrighted works correlate with this goal. Some works do not promote a better society, while others harm society’s well-being. The existence of these works demonstrates that the legal structures in copyright law are somehow encouraging the production of works that do not correlate with the goals of progress. One reason might be that the law has not adequately defined the word “progress.” The ill-definition of progress, the grant of exclusive property rights over creative resources, and the reliance on market rewards to support the incentive to create all undermine the creation of socially impactful works that have a more direct bearing on societal progress. This Article hypothesizes that the cause for the disconnect between creative production and societal progress is due to copyright law’s assumption that there is a single motivator for creativity, which is market rewards, when human beings are motivated to creativity for a multitude of reasons—some intrinsic, such as the innate desire to improve and make a difference, and others extrinsic, such as the motivator to make money from the market. This Article will show how artistic and creative works created by an intrinsically motivated author or creator can facilitate dialogue, include and support marginalized communities, create social change, and mobilize people for social innovation. This indicates that the content of creative works and their impact on society vary depending on whether the author or creator was intrinsically or extrinsically motivated when the work was created, meaning that motivators matter when producing works. As a result, this Article proposes that intrinsic motivators must be insulated from extrinsic ones and presents a taxonomy of normative arrangements of how creative resources may be allocated in society based on the first author’s and subsequent users’ motivation for creating works.