The objective of the study is to present Kant’s conception of copyright and publishing law. The author proceeds from two of Kant’s lesser-known texts, the article “On the Injustice of Reprinting Books” (“Von der Unrechtmäßigkeit des Büchernachdrucks“, 1785) and the treatise On Turning Out Books (Über die Buchmacherei, 1798), which he analyzes and interprets in relation to § 31 of Metaphysics of Morals (Die Metaphysik der Sitten, 1797), where Kant lays out and tries to answer the question “What is a book?” in the context of the discussions and conflicts of the period. On this basis, the author comes to the conclusion that Kant derives his conception of copyright and publishing law from his conception of the nature and function of the book as a manuscript and a printed text. It is further argued that the texts of Kant being scrutinized here can be additionally used for both historical as well as philosophical and systematic research of the issues related, on the one hand, to copyright and publishing law and, on the other, to the problematic of textuality and mediality, which is currently being discussed in the fields of systematic philosophy and the history of philosophy, including professional Kantian research. and Cílem studie je představit Kantovo pojetí autorských a nakladatelských práv. Autor vychází ze dvou méně známých Kantových textů, článku „O neoprávněnosti padělání knih“ (1785) a spisu O výrobě knih (1798), které analyzuje a interpretuje ve vztahu k § 31 Metafyziky mravů (1797), kde Kant v návaznosti na dobové diskuse a spory klade a řeší otázku: „Co je kniha?“ Na tomto základě pak autor dospívá k závěru, že Kantovo pojetí autorských a nakladatelských práv je odvozeno z jeho pojetí podstaty a funkce knihy jakožto rukopisného a tištěného textu. Sledované Kantovy texty je dle autorova názoru možno dále využít jak k historickému, tak filosofickému a systematickému zkoumání otázek souvisejících na jedné straně s problematikou autorských a nakladatelských práv, na straně druhé s problematikou textuality a mediality, která je aktuálně diskutována na poli systematické filosofie i na poli dějin filosofie, včetně odborného kantovského bádání.
The moderate interpretation of the Thomas´Theorem suggests little more than a failure at the assessment of objective situation. Its radical interpretation allows thinking the existence of new social reality. The postmodern condition facilitates this understanding. The underlying idea is not recent; Marx´s theory is a precurson to the constructionist approach. The canonical foundations of social constructionism were laid by Berger and Luckmann, who sought to reconcile Weberian and Durkheimian traditions in their concept of the social construction of reality. Phenomena like gender or consumerism appear to be suitable objects for such an approach. Attribution of meaning in culture nonetheless offers to expand the principle to any domain and, in some cases, such as the labeling theory of deviation, its tries its own limits. Applied to science itself, the pricniple raises questions about the status of scientific knowledge that circumvent epistemological issues. Social consturctionism is itself surpassed by the linguistic turn and discursive theories of soicety. The notion of society as text may challenge realist and objectivist positions. In order to remain productive, however, the notion must retain the presupposition of order and rules of reading and thus admit that, actually, society is not merely a text., Miloslav Petrusek., and Obsahuje použitou literaturu