View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

The Ledger
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston’s Economic Education Newsletter

In this issue

The Loud Noise Over “Free” Music

1 The Loud Noise Over
“Free” Music

Robert Jabaily
Associate Editor, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

5 Whose Words Are They?
8 High School Students
May Enter Two FedSponsored Competitions
10 Patents in America:
Over 350 Years of
Ingenuity
14 Worth a Thousand
Words

Fall 2000

Napster is both the name of a software program
and the name of the company that developed it. The

A teacher walks into a classroom and says, “Today

software is free. Once you download it, you can browse

we’re going to discuss intellectual property rights.”

the Napster database to see if other users have the

Students react by:

music file (song) you’re looking for. Then you can

a) yawning

store the file on your computer’s hard disk and listen

b) tilting back their heads

to the song whenever you like. Some people store

c) stretching out their legs

dozens, or even hundreds, of music files on their com-

d) all of the above.

puter’s hard disk.

The correct answer is all of the above. (And that’s
on a good day!)

The files are known as MP3s, which is shorthand
for MPEG audio Layer-3. MP3 technology makes it

Of course, there are days when no matter what a

possible to compress all the digital information on a

teacher does, students don’t feel like talking. No one is

music CD into a file that’s relatively quick to download

to blame. It’s just a fact of life.

— with little loss of sound quality.

But when a topic captures their imagination —

MP3 files have been around since the early 1990s.

AND they are in the mood to talk — students will open

What Napster did was to make it easier for individual

up. And when that happens, there’s a sense that some-

users (or peers) to share files via the Internet. That’s

thing very special is taking place in the classroom.

where the term P2P comes into play. P2P is shorthand

Can that happen even when the subject is economics and the topic is intellectual property? Yes! And
the challenge isn’t as tough as it seems.
Just mention the word “Napster” to a classroom
full of middle school or high school students, and you’re

for peer-to-peer sharing.
Napster users aren’t downloading music files
from the company’s server. They are sharing files directly with one another and using Napster software to
simplify the process.

likely to trigger a passionate exchange of ideas, or at
least a passionate expression of opinions. And from
there, it’s not much of a stretch to get everyone talking
about intellectual property, enforcement of

This issue of
The Ledger focuses on economic issues embedded in the current
over sharing copyrighted
intellectual property controversy
music via the Internet.
– how the concept
evolved and
What Is Napster?
how it affects our
Napster, MP3, P2P — it’s hard to
keep them all straight. So, let’s review some
lives.
property rights, incentives, and all the other

of the basics.

Eighteen Months That Shook
the Music Biz
In just over 18 months, the marriage of MP3
technology and Napster software dramatically changed
the relationship between music listeners and the
recording industry.
January 1999: Shawn Fanning, a 19-year-old college freshman, decides not to go back for second semester. He’ll spend the next few months finishing up a
software program called Napster. When he’s done, even
technically challenged Internet users will be able to swap
MP3 files and listen to music — much of it copyrighted

The Ledger
Bob Jabaily, Editor

— without paying a cent to
anyone. It’s a music lover’s
dream — a cross between
the ultimate record collec-

Public and Community
Affairs Department
Federal Reserve Bank
of Boston
P.O. Box 2076
Boston, MA
02106-2076
Or phone:
(617) 973-3452

tion and a magic radio that
will play almost any song you
want, whenever YOU want
to hear it.
January 2000: Unless
you’re a college student, the
name “Napster” still doesn’t
mean much to you. Is it a

This newsletter is published
three times a year as a public
service by the Federal Reserve
Bank of Boston. The reporting of
news about economic education
programs and the materials
contained herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston
or the Board of Governors.

mattress? A recliner? A
slacker?

Who knows?

Who cares? But things are
about to change.
August 2000: Napster
has become a full-fledged
phenomenon, and Shawn
Fanning’s picture is showing
up on the cover of Business

Copies of this newsletter and a
catalog of other educational
materials and research publications may be obtained free of
charge by writing:
Publications
Public and Community
Affairs Department
Federal Reserve Bank
of Boston
P.O. Box 2076
Boston, MA
02106-2076
internet:
www.bos.frb.org

Week and Time. Anywhere
from 15 to 30 million people
are sharing music with one
another via the Net.
Napster users consider it a technological
marvel. But record companies and some very highprofile recording artists
consider it piracy, and their
lawyers are suing Napster

Elvis, 1956

for copyright infringe-

Back then, anyone who wanted
to hear “The King” had only two
real choics: buy his records or
turn on the radio and wait.

ment. In late July, a federal
judge rules that Napster is

e-mail:

encouraging widespread

robert.jabaily@bos.frb.org

copyright infringment and

Credit: Prints and Photographs
Division, Library of Congress

issues an injunction to stop the company from aiding

Piracy or Peer-to-Peer Sharing?

in the exchange of copyrighted music. Within two

Copyright battles are nothing new. Copyright

days, another federal court lifts the injunction, but

protection is a well-established legal principle. Here’s

the lawsuit against Napster continues to move

how a circular from the United States Copyright Office

through the courts on a relatively fast track. The

describes it:

company’s long-term survival may well depend on

“Copyright” literally means the right to copy. . . . The

how a panel of three federal judges decides to inter-

owner of copyright has the exclusive right to reproduce, dis-

pret copyright laws.

tribute, and, in the case of certain works, publicly perform
or display the work; to prepare derivative works; or to li-

cense others to engage in the same acts under specific

case is extremely complicated, but at the risk of over-

terms and conditions.

simplifying, here are the two opposing positions:

Sounds fairly straightforward: You can use

• The way the music industry sees it, musicians

someone else’s work only if they give you permis-

and record companies are not being paid for the works

sion. And if you are going to profit from using it,

they created. Are they saying that Napster is directly vi-

you have to cut them in on the action. But like

olating copyright? No. Rather, they’re contending that

most things that sound straightforward, copyright

Napster is making it possible for millions of Internet

law is open to more than one interpretation.

users to violate copyright. It’s called “tributary” or “con-

The music industry and Napster ended up in

tributory” copyright infringement.

federal court because of a disagreement over what

• Napster takes the position that its users are en-

actually constitutes copyright infringement. The

gaging in noncommercial sharing of music, an activity
they say is permitted under the “fair

Technology and the Protection of
Intellectual Property
Technology has made it possible for singers and songwriters to reach a much wider audience, but
it has also made it harder for them to control access to the work they’ve created. And the pace of
technological change is raising new issues that are forcing everyone to re-examine established
ways of doing business.
1850 Jenny Lind, “The Swedish Nightingale,” captivates American audiences. With P. T. Barnum
as her promoter, Ms. Lind performs 150 concerts in 19 U. S. cities. The tour is an artistic triumph and a financial success. Anyone who wants to enjoy Jenny Lind’s beautiful voice has only
one option: buy a ticket.
1878 Thomas Edison patents the phonograph. The invention will ultimately make it possible to
hear the world’s most talented and popular singers without ever leaving home. But recording
artists and promoters still control access to their product because consumers must pay to buy
records.
1920 The first American commercial radio station – KDKA in Pittsburgh – goes on the air. Music
comes to listeners’ homes via the airwaves. And it’s free! But there’s a catch: You have no
direct control over what you hear. You can listen to the radio all day and still not hear your
favorite song.
1975-1985 Cassette players and VCRs give consumers the capability to copy their favorite music
and movies. Not only that, but they can also share the copies with their friends. But the sharing
takes place on a fairly limited scale. Most people are sharing the tapes only with family and
friends.
1999 Napster makes it possible for consumers to swap free music on a massive scale. Users are
downloading free music files off the computers of complete strangers.

use” provisions of copyright law.
Then there are other parties,
who don’t necessarily even care
about music, but are concerned that
a successful attempt to shut down
Napster could slow the adoption of
new technology and perhaps lead to
greater restrictions on sharing information via the Internet.
Hilary Rosen, president and
CEO of the Recording Industry
Association of America, says the
case “has never been about technology. Rather it is about Napster’s
abuse of peer-to-peer technology
for its own commercial benefit.”
Napster counters that it
would be willing to charge users a
subscription fee and provide up to
80 percent of the revenue to record
companies. The initial amount
mentioned – $4.95 a month – failed
to generate much enthusiasm from
major record labels.

2000 According to the Pew Internet & American Life Project’s Online Music Report:
• “78% of Internet users who download music don’t think it’s stealing to
save music files to their computer hard drives.”
• “21% of online music consumers say they have ended up buying the
music on a CD or cassette ‘most of the time.’”

But the question of subscription fees also raises another issue at
stake in the Napster controversy:
ultimate control over the online distribution of digital music. Will the
recording industry maintain sole

• “26% of music downloaders say they have ‘never’ bought a CD or cassette of the music they have captured online.”

control, or will record companies
share control with companies such

• “The number of files per user library on Napster has been steadily
increasing since our June 2000 report. At that time there were approximately 100 songs per user library. The current average [September
2000] is 140 songs per user library.”

as Napster?
continued

The Ledger • Fall 2000

3

Things to Think About

• A 37-year-old Napster user told The New York

• Here’s a question that everyone seems to be

Times that he downloads digital files of songs that he

asking in one form or another: Why is it that people

bought in the 1970s but can’t listen to because he no

who would never dream of stealing a CD from a

longer owns a turntable: “I bought the right to listen to

record store seem so untroubled by downloading

King Crimson 15 years ago. I’m just making a digital

copyrighted music?

copy of what I have in my closet.”

• What impact has Internet/digital technology

What do you think?

had on the enforceability of copyright laws?
• If copyright laws become tougher to enforce,

Resources

some singers and songwriters could end up making

1. How Stuff Works is a web site that delivers just

less money. What effect would that have on their will-

what its title promises: clear explanations of how

ingness to create new works or to continue applying

things work. Napster, MP3 – it’s all there.

their talents?

www.howstuffworks.com

Patents, Trademarks, Trade
Secrets, and Copyright

2. It’s almost impossible to look at a magazine or
newspaper without seeing an article about the
online music controversy. For those who want
more detail, The New York Times web site carries an

Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution gives Congress the
power 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.”
Those “Writings and Discoveries”
are what we now refer to as intellectual property, and federal law
provides four ways to protect various forms of intellectual property:

extensive collection of articles.
http://forums.nytimes.com/comment/
index-tech.html
3. The Pew Internet & American Life Project’s
Online Music Report
www.pewinternet.org
4. United States Copyright Office
http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/

• Patents grant exclusive rights for
up to 20 years on inventions, useful processes, certain agricultural
innovations, and certain types of
ornamental or distinctive designs.
• Trademarks protect words,
names, symbols, sounds, or colors that distinguish a product or
service. Registered trademarks
can be renewed forever.
• Trade secrets protect information that gives companies an
advantage over competitors.
(The formula for a certain wellknown soft drink is an example of
a trade secret.)
• Copyright protects “original
works of authorship,” including
the works of writers, composers,
filmmakers, dramatists, sculptors, and photographers. (Even pantomime can be protected by copyright!) Copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus 50 years.
(Excerpted from What Is Intellectual Property?, United States Office
of Patents and Trademarks, www.uspto.gov)

4

Fall 2000 • The Ledger

5. United States Copyright Office
A Brief History and Overview
www.loc.gov/copyright/docs/circ1a.html
6. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Museum
www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ahrpa/opa/museum/
7. Thomas A. Edison Papers, a web site hosted by
Rutgers University, offers an interesting look at an
inventor who knew a thing or two about protecting
his intellectual property rights.
http://edison.rutgers.edu/taep.htm

Whose Words Are They?
Internet Churns Up Copyright Waters
Scott Guild

sites whose sole purpose was to make essays and term

Director of Economic and Museum Education
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

papers available on-line to students. The individual

Visit the Internet today, and you’ll find a multitude of sites offering students information, essays, and

web sites had as few as one hit per day to as many as
437. As of August 1, 2000, the total number of hits
for these 30 sites ranged from 101 hits to 180, 267.

term papers they can submit unaltered and uncited as
their own work. The proliferation of these sites draws
new attention to the age-old problem of taking personal credit for the work of others.
Arguably the worst scholarly infraction that can
be committed, plagiarism is simple to define:
1. The act of plagiarizing or appropriating the ideas,

Copyright and Fair Use
One of the most alluring aspects of the Internet is
its capability to promote the free exchange of ideas. No
less a person than Thomas Jefferson has expounded eloquently on the merits of a free exchange of ideas.
Imagine if he could have foreseen the Internet!

writings or inventions of another without due acknowledge-

Interestingly, copyright laws both rein in the

ment; specif. the stealing of passages either word for word or

Internet’s free exchange of ideas and facilitate it.

in substance, from the writings of another and publishing
them as one’s own.
2. A writing, utterance, or
invention stolen from another. 1
Getting away with
plagiarism used to be more
difficult because resources
available

for

student

research were somewhat
restricted. Students based
their research on the writings of a limited number of

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening
mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the
moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition,
seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she
made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density
at any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical
being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then
cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.
— Thomas Jefferson

experts in a particular field or discipline. Teachers

Copyright laws offer protections to authors so authors

were generally quite familiar with the work of these

are willing to make their materials available and to let

experts. Either they had read the works cover-to-

others use them — up to a point.

cover themselves, or they were at least familiar with

When Thomas Jefferson and other creators of

the major ideas and concepts contained in these

the Enlightenment designed the system that became

materials. This familiarity made it difficult for stu-

American copyright law, their objective was to assure a

dents to pass off others’ intellectual work as their own.

widespread distribution of thought. Being able to profit

Today, with the Internet, sources of informa-

from the sale of one’s book was seen as the fuel that

tion have grown exponentially. The resulting free

would carry ideas into the minds, libraries, and book-

exchange of ideas, instant access to information, and

stores of the Republic.

lower barriers between disciplines have created a re-

Copyright laws exist for three basic reasons:

search world not only of almost unlimited sources

(1) to reward authors for their creative work;

but also of tempting opportunities for shortcuts in

(2) to encourage the availability of the work to the

completing assignments. In researching this article,
I came across a web page that identified 30 separate

general public; and
(3) to facilitate access to, and use of, the work in

1 Funk and Wagnalls New Standard Dictionary (1921).
The Ledger • Fall 2000

5

Help from the Cause

appropriate public situations.
With the advent of copy machines, faxes, and com-

Copyright and fair use rules do not

puters, educators would seem to be putting themselves

begin to address all the problems regarding

into a compromising situation when simply seeking to

appropriate use of digitized property.

provide their students with current and accurate infor-

Ironically, the very tool that has en-

mation. Teachers and professors regularly copy pages

abled such “piracy” of others’ ideas is also

and segments of books in an attempt to provide their stu-

beginning to provide the means for com-

dents with timely resources for study.

bating such activity. There are now web

Fortunately, educators have sub-

sites that can assist teachers and professors

stantial latitude with the limits of

in identifying papers from Internet term

copyright. The “fair use priv-

paper mills. Similarly, there are useful web

ilege” covers most photo-

sites to assist students in avoiding plagia-

copying that educators

rism and any potential academic impro-

do. An authority in

priety. Here are some of these web sites:

C

this area is Duane

• Plagiarized.com: The Instructors

Goehner, a Seattle-

Guide to Internet Plagiarism at www.pla-

based consultant in

giarized.com provides online training, re-

computer

search advice, and examples of “dead give-

tech-

nology, web design,
and anti-piracy/copy-

Whose Words Are They?
Fall 2000 • The Ledger

It was developed by

Gregory Senechal.

right. In a paper pre-

• The University of California at

sented at a 1997 conference

Davis has a web site, Avoiding Plagiarism,

and available on his web site,

http://sja.ucdavis.edu/sja/plagiarism.html,

Mr. Goehner observes, “Without the

designed to help with just that. It is dedi-

‘fair use’ privilege, copyright would not serve

cated to assisting students in “mastering the

its constitutional purpose ‘to promote the Progress of

art of scholarship.” It provides citation

Science and useful Arts.’” 2

methods and guidelines for avoiding pla-

To determine fair use, four factors are considered:

giarism. It states that ignorance of what

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including

plagiarism is does not excuse a violation.

whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-

6

away” cheating.

profit educational purposes;

• The Columbia Guide to Online Style, developed
by Janice R. Walker and available at http://www.co-

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

lumbia.edu/cu/cup/cgos/idx_basic.html, provides a

(3) the amount and sustainability of the portion

guide to citation of online documents in both hu-

used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

manities and scientific formats. Her work in this area

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market

has been cited in Internet News, USA Today, and the

for, or value of, the copyrighted work.

Chronicle of Higher Education.

All four factors are considered when trying to de-

The above list is far from exhaustive. It is, how-

termine if a use of copyrighted material is fair.

ever, representative of the type and quality of web as-

According to Mr. Goehner, as long as the intent of

sistance available to help teachers and students make

teachers and professors is for “productive” or “intrinsic”

wise academic use of the web.

purposes (such as for criticism or scholarship), then their
copying of the material is protected and legal. What is
not protected is use of the material by the teacher for
commercial or financial purposes.
2 “An Ethical Edge in Education: Cognizance of Copyrights and Copy Wrongs.” Duane Goehner. Paper presented at international

conference, Seattle, Washington, October 1997. Available at http://goehner.com/copyright.htm.

Paradigm Shift:
New Resource from FRB

I

n many ways, the Internet allows for the disintermediation of — replacement of — the traditional
role of the teacher/professor. The student is
able to access information without going through
the screen of the instructor. Though efficient, this
immediate and ubiquitous access to information may
not be as effective as the traditional route, since it
requires students to do the screening process previously performed by the teacher or professor.
There are two potential challenges and one significant drawback to this approach:
• The first challenge is for students to become
more critical readers and to be more selective in the
information they use.
• The second challenge is for teachers to spend
more time nurturing critical thinking rather than information transfer.
• The drawback is that, if these challenges are
not both met, the result could be role confusion and
weak scholarship.

The best of all possible worlds would be to use
technology to shift the paradigm and change the
existing ratio of one teacher to a classroom of students to one student to a network of experts.
Such a paradigm shift is currently under
development at the Federal Reser ve Bank of
Boston. Through our ResearchNet, which is in the
early stages of development, students doing primary economic research will be supported by a
network of experts and other resources brought
together for this specific purpose. Using guidelines similar to those for the National History Day
competition, students will research their community’s economic history. They will then choose
from a variety of formats — videotape, audiotape,
a poster exhibit, a publication, a web site — to
produce a final project.
For more information on ResearchNet, please
contact Scott Guild, director of economic and museum education at the Boston Fed, at 617/973-3639.

The Ledger • Fall 2000

7

High School Students May Enter
Two Fed-Sponsored Competitions
maintain or alter (and to what degree) the current course

Rob Wedge
Economic Education Specialist
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

of monetary policy.
Following a team’s presentation, the judges lead

For the sixth consecutive year, the Federal

the team through a 15-minute question-and-answer ses-

Reserve Bank of Boston will offer the Fed Challenge

sion. The judges’ questions range from issues raised in

to high school students. This competition asks stu-

the team’s presentation to requests for clarification of

dents to simulate the roles of Federal Reserve mone-

data to student interpretation of recent economic events.

tary policymakers. It encourages the development of

The competition consists of three rounds: a pre-

important skills such

liminary round held at several locations in New

as research, deci-

England; a New England district final held at the

sion-making,

Boston Fed; and a national final at the Board of

argument for-

Governors in Washington, DC. A box accompanying

mulation,

this article provides more information on dates and lo-

and effective

cations for the various rounds.

communication.
For
the second

A Fed Challenge orientation session for teachers
in the First District will be held on Friday, January 26,
2001, at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, from 8:00
a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

year in a row,

Since the first competition in 1996, the Fed

the Boston Fed will

Challenge has caught the attention of the business world.

offer the Economics Challenge. Broader in scope than

It has received various corporate recognitions:

the Fed Challenge, this competition asks students to

• Citibank has established the Citibank

draw on their knowledge and understanding of all as-

Scholarships and Grants for the Fed Challenge. As a

pects of economics.

result, the team that wins the National Championship
will be awarded $40,000, composed of $25,000 in

Fed Challenge
Each five-member Fed Challenge team makes
a 15-minute presentation before a panel of judges at

grant to set up an in-school economics laboratory.
Each of the three other national finalist teams will

Market Committee, the Federal Reserve’s monetary

take home a total of $15,000, composed of $10,000 in

policy arm. Presentations include, but are not limited

scholarship money ($2,000 per student), a $2,000

to, the following:

achievement award (for the teacher), and a $3,000 grant

of the day of the competition;

to set up an in-school economics laboratory.
• The New York Times Newspaper-in-Education

2. Predictions about economic, financial, and in-

Program will provide newspapers to Fed challenge par-

ternational conditions in the near term that would be

ticipants in areas served by The New York Times delivery

of special significance for the development of monetary

services and a special gift to the teacher and members of

policy, such as inflation, unemployment, real GDP

each Federal Reserve District champion team.

growth, and other economic policy indicators;
3. Explanation of issues that should receive special attention in formulating current monetary policy;
4. Recommendations to the Federal Reserve to

Fall 2000 • The Ledger

achievement award (for the teacher), and a $10,000

a mock, modified meeting of the Federal Open

1. Analysis of current economic conditions as

8

scholarships ($5,000 per team member), a $5,000

• The McGraw-Hill Companies will sponsor a
recognition dinner in Washington, DC, for all students
and teachers of Federal Reserve District champions.
• The Fed Challenge has been endorsed by the

Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, the
National Academy Foundation, and The Conference
Board.
If you are in the First District and have questions
about the Fed Challenge, please contact the Boston
Fed at the following toll free number:
1-800-409-1FED (or 1333)
Within the 617 area code, call (617) 973-3639.
Or check out our Fed Challenge web address:
http://www.bos.frb.org/educate/fedchal/fedchal.htm.
If you are outside the First District and would
like more information, please contact the Federal

2001 Fed Challenge Schedule
Teachers Orientation
Friday, January 26 — FRB Boston
8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
Preliminary Rounds
March 8 — FRB Boston
March 22 — FRB Boston
March 23 — northern New England (site to be determined)
March 27 — FRB Boston
March 28 — FRB Boston
March 30 — University of Connecticut, West Hartford
New England District Final
April 3 — FRB Boston
National Final
April 28-30 — Board of Governors, Washington, DC

Reserve Bank in your District.

2001 Economics Challenge Schedule
Economics Challenge
Each Economics Challenge team consists of
three to five members. Each team member answers a

Preliminary Rounds in Each State
April 23-27 — locations to be announced
First District Finals
May 3 — FRB Boston

20-minute, written test consisting of 15 multiple-choice
questions. The sum of the top three individual scores
on each team represents the team score. The test covers
the following six areas: microeconomics, macroeconomics, international economics, current events, financial literacy, and economic history.
Schools are divided into two groups: (1) college
preparatory and honors classes, and (2) advanced placement or college-in-the-schools program. The top three
teams from each group advance to the team final. The
top three individual scorers from each group move on
to the individual final.
The individual and team finals are college-bowl
style competitions, with the first to the buzzer having
the opportunity to answer the question. Contestants
in each final are asked 30 open-response questions
picked randomly from the six areas. A maximum of
15 minutes is allowed for each final.

Previous First District Fed Challenge Winners
2000:
1999:
1998:
1997:
1996:

Gorham High School — Gorham, New Hampshire
Choate Rosemary Hall — Wallingford, Connecticut
Choate Rosemary Hall — Wallingford, Connecticut
Gorham High School — Gorham, New Hampshire
Hyde Park High School — Boston, Massachusetts

2000 Economics Challenge Winners
Team Winners
1st Place:

Mississquoi Valley Union High School —
Swanton, VT
2nd Place:
Boston Latin School — Boston, MA
3rd Place:
The Bromfield School — Harvard, MA
Individual Winners
1st Place:
Michael Sharrow — Mississquoi
Valley Union High School
2nd Place:
John Abrashkin — Northampton High School,
Northampton, MA
3rd Place:
Brook Wilson — Mississquoi Valley Union
High School

Following the finals, there is an awards ceremony
at which individual and team prizes are awarded.
Because of the tremendous response to the 2000

Boston Fed at the following toll free number:
1-800-409-1FED (or 1333)

pilot competition, the Boston Fed will conduct the

Within the 617 area code, call (617) 973-3639.

2001 Economics Challenge in two rounds. State com-

Or go to our Economics Challenge web address:

petitions will take place in each state during the week

http://www.bos.frb.org/educate/html/econcha.htm.

of April 23. The winners in the two groups, AP and

(And if you are interested in taking last year’s multiple-

non-AP, will advance to District finals at the Federal

choice section, check the same location.)

Reserve Bank of Boston on May 3.
For more information about the Economics
Challenge for the First District, please contact the

If you are outside the First District and would
like more information, please contact the Federal
Reserve Bank in your District.

The Ledger • Fall 2000

9

Patents in America:
Over 350 Years of Ingenuity
Michael Stewart

Jenks learned all the skills necessary to practice his

Economic Education Specialist
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

chosen trade, sword-making. After practicing his
trade for several years in England, Jenks left for a fresh

Patents are one of many ways to protect intel-

start in the New World. By the mid

lectual property. Today, anyone who “invents or dis-

1640s, he had already set up a black-

covers any new and useful process, machine, manu-

smith shop in Maine and moved

facture, or composition of matter, or any new and

on to a new venture in

useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent.”

Massachusetts.

Patents grant the holder the right to “exclude others

On May 10, 1646,

from making, using, offering for sale, selling or im-

Joseph Jenks applied to

porting the invention.”1

the

What does all this mean? It means that a person

Massachusetts

General Court for a

who comes up with a design for a new invention or a

patent to “Build a

new way of doing something, so long as it is original

Mill for making

and useful (useful meaning that your invention or

of Sithes; and

process actually works), can, in fact, exclude all others

alsoe a new

from making, using, selling, or importing that design

Invented

or process. Economically speaking, patents grant their

S a w

holders a monopoly.

Mill,

Intellectual property has been getting a lot of press

and

lately, but the concept of intellectual property goes back
hundreds of years. Great Britain holds the record for
the longest continuous patent tradition. British patents
date back to the fifteenth century, when Henry VI
granted John of Utynam a 20-year monopoly on a
process for making stained glass windows in 1449. This
is the earliest known British patent.
The British patent system was in turn carried
over to the North American colonies. The first
industrial patent in America was
granted over 350 years ago to a
man named Joseph Jenks in what
is now Saugus, Massachusetts.
At 16 years of age, Jenks,
like other seventeenth century
English artisans, was apprenticed
to a master craftsman for a period
of seven years. During that time,
1U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
http://www.uspto.gov

10

Fall 2000 • The Ledger

Something to Think About
1. In the history of the United States, only one
President has been granted a patent. Which
President was this, and what was the patent for?
(answer on page 16)
2. Pick one idea you have had that you think is worth
protecting from others and see if you think it meets
the criteria for a U.S. patent. To find the criteria for
design patents, go to the U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office web site at www.uspto.gov and click on “A
Guide to Filing a Design Patent Application.”

divers other Engines for making of divers sorts of edge
tools.” Jenks claimed that he had “knowledg in Making,
and Erecting of Engines of Mills to goe by water for the
speedy dispatch of much worke by few mens labour in
little time.”
By this time, Jenks had nearly 30 years’ experience as a cutler. He had a variety of skills that were
rare in the colonies. His aim was to protect himself
and his intellectual property from “free riders.” “Grant
mee this privledg; and to order that noe other
person shall sett upp or use any
such

In 1646, Joseph Jenks received
America’s first industrial patent to
operate a mill in what is now
Saugus, Massachusetts.
Photo Courtesy U.S. Dept. of the
Interior National Park Service,
Saugus Iron Works National
Historic Site

new

Why are ticket prices so high?
Is anybody worth that much?
Why are owners and players always squabbling?

Peanuts & Crackerjacks
a FREE web-based baseball game,
answers these questions and more.
It’s all on the web. Go to
www.bos.frb.org.
Click on

f
m ic s o p o r t s
E c o nroo Te a m S
P

ts
Peanu erjacksston
ckrve Bank of Bo
Crara
l Rese

&

Ec
o
P rn o m
o T ics
e a of
m
Sp
o

Fede

&PCeanuts
Fed

mics:
Econo
us.
around
ll
It's a
eball
ur bas
Play o
web
e
th
n
o
game
ore.
m
t
d ou
and fin
rg
os.frb.o
www.b
eanuts rjacks
P
n
Cracke
click o

Eco

&C

u
rac ts
ke
rja

cks

s

ts
cksston
nu kerjaank of Bo
a
Pe racserve B
Ceral Re

&

Fed

:
us.
ics
om ound
n
o
r
all
a
Ec
seb
all
ba web
It's
r
f
u
o m ic smo S p o rt s
the ore.
yo
E co nro
P Te a
Pla e on ut m
o
m
g
ga find
.or
frb ts
d
.
ks
s
n
o
a
u
jac
ston
w.b Pean cker
k of Bo
rve Ban
ww on &Cra
ral Rese
e
d
k
Fe
clic

s
Peanut jacks
k
c
Cra er

&

ics:
Econom
s.
round u
a
It's all
all
r baseb
Play ou
eb
w
e
n th
game o
more.
t
u
o
d
and fin
rg
os.frb.o
www.b
ts
u
n
a
e
P
s
ckerjack
click on

&Cra

rac

lR

It's nomi
cs
a
Pla ll aro :
un
yo
du
ga
m ur b
s.
an e on ase
b
df
a
t
h
l
i
nd
ew l
ww
o
clic w.bo ut m eb
o
s.fr
ko
b.o re.
n
r
Pe
g
an

&

t
of o r
cs Sp
mi eam
o
n T
E c oP r o

era

ese

Peanuts
& Crackerjacks

rts

ke

rve

rja

Ba

nk

cks

of

Bo

sto

n

invention or trade for the space of fowerteene yeeres
without my licence; . . . least after your petitioner have
expended his estate, study, and labour, and have
brought things to perfection; Another when hee seeth
it, maketh the like; and soe I loose the benefitt of that
I have studies for many yeeres before.”
Jenks was granted this monopoly for a period of
14 years. This 14-year limit was in accordance with the
Statute of Monopolies of 1624, which made unlawful
all monopolies except those “for the term of 14 years or
under hereafter to be made of the sole working or
making of any manner of new manufactures within this
Realm to the true and first inventor.”
Jenks successfully set up his “new Invented . . . Mill”
on property owned by the Company of Undertakers of
the Iron Works in Lynn (today this location is part of
Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site). Jenks used
water diverted from the tailrace of one of the Company’s
seven or so water wheels to power three water wheels for
his own operation. He operated a saw mill and produced
edged tools, among other things.
Jenks went on to apply for other patents as well.
In 1655, he was granted a seven-year monopoly for the

Patents in America:
Over 350 Years of Ingenuity

production of an “engine . . . for the more speedy cutting of grasse.” Historians are not sure whether this
monopoly was for a new type of scythe or a new scythemaking process. In 1672, he petitioned the General
Court for permission to mint coins, but the petition was
denied. Jenks lived a long and relatively prosperous life.
He died in 1683, just shy of his 84th birthday.
By granting exclusive intellectual property rights,
patents protect and promote individual and corporate
investment into research and development. In this way,
patents have aided in the economic development of the
United States.
To learn more about Joseph Jenks and the first industrial patent in America, visit the “Birth Place of
America’s Iron Industry,” Saugus Iron Works National
Historic Site, 244 Central Street, Saugus, Massachusetts
01960, or visit the Saugus Iron Works web site,
www.nps.gov/sair. The phone number is 781/9412372. Saugus Iron Works NHS is open every day except Thanksgiving, December 25, and January 1.

Sources
1. Stephen P Carlson, Joseph Jenks Colonial Tool
Maker and Inventor. Eastern National Parks and
Monuments Association, 1985.
2. Petition of Joseph Jenks. Massachusetts Archives,
vol. 59. Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.
Boston, Massachusetts.
3. Saugus Iron Works: Official Map and Guide.
National Park Service, U.S. Department of the
Interior, 2000.
4. Patents. U.K. Patent Office.
http://www.patent.gov.uk
5. General Information Concerning Patents. U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office.
http://www.uspto.gov

Worth a
Thousand Wo

ords
Worth a Thousand Words uses the camera’s eye to revisit moments in New England’s
past when economics and history converged.

Before Napster,There Was Fiedler
Free music is not a new concept. The Boston Pops Orchestra, which began in
1885 as an offshoot of the Boston Symphony, has been treating audiences to free outdoor concerts for generations.
Conductor Arthur Fiedler began the tradition on July 4, 1929. And nearly 50
years later, on July 4, 1976, he was at the podium when the Pops and more than
400,000 revelers celebrated America’s 200th birthday with a memorable concert on
the banks of Boston’s Charles River.
Today, the free Independence Day performances continue to draw hundreds of
thousands of listeners, many of whom start showing up at sunrise to stake out prime
spots for the evening’s festivities. The program always includes Sousa’s “Stars and
Stripes Forever” and Tchaikovsky’s “1812 Overture.” And everyone always goes home
happy. It’s truly a “people’s concert,” complete with spectacular fireworks, blazing
howitzers, and lots of flag-waving.
Arthur Fiedler and the Boston
Pops in 1929, the orchestra’s
first season of free
outdoor concerts.
Photo courtesy of the Boston
Symphony Orchestra Archives

For more on the history of the Boston Pops, visit the orchestra’s web site at
www.bso.org, where, among other things, you will learn that the Pops was originally
founded to provide summer employment for musicians of the Boston Symphony.

Which U.S. President Was It?
answer to question on page 10
Abraham Lincoln was granted a patent for a
“new and improved manner of combining
adjustable buoyant air chambers with a
steamboat or other vessel for the purpose of
enabling their draught of water to be readily
lessened to enable them to pass over bars, or
through shallow water, without discharging
their cargoes.”

In Our Next Issue...
The next issue of The Ledger will focus on the economics of sports:
• Why the WWF became a smash success.
• The business of women’s pro football.
• The life and times of Major Taylor, the 19th century bicycle racer who was one of
America’s first sports superstars.
• Preview of Peanuts & Crackerjacks, the Boston Fed’s new Internet-based unit
on the economics of pro team sports.
• And more..

The Ledger
Public and Community Affairs
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston
600 Atlantic Avenue
P.O. Box 2076
Boston, MA 02106-2076
Change Service Requested

First Class
U.S. Postage Paid
Boston, MA
Permit No. 59702