按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
According to Adam Smith： 〃Money has become； in all civilized
nations； the universal instrument of commerce； by the intervention
of which goods of all kinds are bought and sold or exchanged for one
another。〃 This definition expands the empirical conception of money to
the rational idea of it； by taking regard only to the implied form
of the reciprocal performances in the onerous contracts； and thus
abstracting from their matter。 It is thus conformable to the
conception of right in the permutation and exchange of the mine and
thine generally （commutatio late sic dicta）。 The definition；
therefore； accords with the representation in the above synopsis of
a dogmatic division of contracts a priori； and consequently with the
metaphysical principle of right in general。
II。 What is a Book？
A book is a writing which contains a discourse addressed by some one
to the public； through visible signs of speech。 It is a matter of
indifference to the present considerations whether it is written by
a pen or imprinted by types； and on few or many pages。 He who speaks
to the public in his own name is the author。 He who addresses the
writing to the public in the name of the author is the publisher。 When
a publisher does this with the permission or authority of the
author； the act is in accordance with right； and he is the rightful
publisher； but if this is done without such permission or authority；
the act is contrary to right； and the publisher is a counterfeiter
or unlawful publisher。 The whole of a set of copies of the original
document is called an edition。
The Unauthorized Publishing of Books is Contrary to the
Principles of Right； and is Rightly Prohibited。
A writing is not an immediate direct presentation of a conception；
as is the case； for instance； with an engraving that exhibits a
portrait； or a bust or cast by a sculptor。 It is a discourse addressed
in a particular form to the public； and the author may be said to
speak publicly by means of his publisher。 The publisher； again； speaks
by the aid of the printer as his workman （operarius）； yet not in his
own name； for otherwise he would be the author； but in the name of the
author； and he is only entitled to do so in virtue of a mandate
given him to that effect by the author。 Now the unauthorized printer
and publisher speaks by an assumed authority in his publication； in
the name indeed of the author； but without a mandate to that effect
（gerit se mandatarium absque mandato）。 Consequently such an
unauthorized publication is a wrong committed upon the authorized
and only lawful publisher； as it amounts to a pilfering of the profits
which the latter was entitled and able to draw from the use of his
proper right （furtum usus）。 Unauthorized printing and publication of
books is； therefore； forbidden… as an act of counterfeit and piracy…
on the ground of right。
There seems； however； to be an impression that there is a sort of
common right to print and publish books； but the slightest
reflection must convince any one that this would be a great injustice。
The reason of it is found simply in the fact that a book； regarded
from one point of view； is an external product of mechanical art （opus
mechanicum）； that can be imitated by any one who may be in rightful
possession of a copy； and it is therefore his by a real right。
But； from another point of view； a book is not merely an external
thing； but is a discourse of the publisher to the public； and he is
only entitled to do this publicly under the mandate of the author
（praestatio operae）； and this constitutes a personal right。 The
error underlying the impression referred to； therefore； arises from an
interchange and confusion of these two kinds of right in relation to
books。
Confusion of Personal Right and Real Right。
The confusion of personal right with real right may be likewise
shown by reference to a difference of view in connection with
another contract； falling under the head of contracts of hiring （B II。
I）； namely； the contract of lease （jus incolatus）。 The question is
raised as to whether a proprietor when he has sold a house or a
piece of ground held on lease； before the expiry of the period of
lease； was bound to add the condition of the continuance of the
lease to the contract of purchase； or whether it should be held that
〃purchase breaks hire；〃 of course under reservation of a period of
warning determined by the nature of the subject in use。 In the
former view； a house or farm would be regarded as having a burden
lying upon it； constituting a real right acquired in it by the lessee；
and this might well enough be carried out by a clause merely indorsing
or ingrossing the contract of lease in the deed of sale。 But as it
would no longer then be a simple lease； another contract would
properly be required to be conjoined； a matter which few lessors would
be disposed to grant。 The proposition； then； that 〃Purchase breaks
hire〃 holds in principle； for the full right in a thing as a
property overbears all personal right； which is inconsistent with
it。 But there remains a right of action to the lessee； on the ground
of a personal right for indemnification on account of any loss arising
from breaking of the contract。
EPISODICAL SECTION。 The Ideal Acquisition of External
Objects of the Will。
32。 The Nature and Modes of Ideal Acquisition。
I call that mode of acquisition ideal which involves no causality in
time； and which is founded upon a mere idea of pure reason。 It is
nevertheless actual； and not merely imaginary acquisition： and it is
not called real only because the act of acquisition is not
empirical。 This character of the act arises from the peculiarity
that the person acquiring acquires from another who either is not yet；
and who can only be regarded as a possible being； or who is just
ceasing to be； or who no longer is。 Hence such a mode of attaining
to possession is to be regarded as a mere practical idea of reason。
There are three modes of ideal acquisition：
I。 Acquisition by usucapion；
II。 Acquisition by inheritance or succession；
III。 Acquisition by undying merit （meritum immortale）； or the
claim by right to a good name at death。
These three modes of acquisition can； as a matter of fact； only have
effect in a public juridical state of existence； but they are not
founded merely upon the civil constitution or upon arbitrary statutes；
they are already contained a priori in the conception of the state
of nature； and are thus necessarily conceivable prior to their
empirical manifestation。 The laws regarding them in the civil
constitution ought to be regulated by that rational conception。
33。 I。 Acquisition by Usucapion。
（Acquisitio per Usucapionem）。
I may acquire the property of another merely by long possession
and use of it （usucapi