Question

Passage A
For centuries, legal scholars have predominantly viewed the enactment of the 1710 Statute of Anne—the world’s first comprehensive copyright law—as a watershed moment in the recognition of authors' natural rights. According to this deeply entrenched historical narrative, the statute represents a philosophical triumph of the individual over the collective. Prior to this legislation, the concept of intellectual property as an inherent right of the creator was virtually nonexistent; rights to texts were held almost exclusively by printers and publishers. Proponents of the natural-rights interpretation argue that the statute fundamentally redefined the relationship between creators and their work by enshrining the idea that authors possess an inherent, moral entitlement to the fruits of their intellectual labor. By firmly placing the author at the center of the copyright ecosystem, the law reflected a broader cultural movement that elevated original thought, suggesting that as the concept of individual genius gained cultural currency, the law naturally evolved to shield these independent creators from exploitation. The primary significance of the statute is thus understood as the codification of a philosophical ideal.

Passage B
A closer examination of the political and economic landscape of early eighteenth-century England reveals that the romanticized narrative of early copyright law as a champion of authors’ rights is largely a retrospective projection. The true impetus behind the Statute of Anne was not philosophical, but fiercely pragmatic: it was a calculated legislative intervention aimed at dismantling the oppressive monopoly of the Stationers’ Company. For decades, this powerful guild of printers and booksellers had maintained absolute control over the book trade, suppressing competition and dictating terms to both the state and the public. When the Stationers' perpetual licensing system expired, they actively lobbied parliament for a new legal framework to preserve their dominance. Ironically, the resulting statute, while ostensibly granting rights to authors, was primarily a regulatory mechanism designed to introduce statutory limits on copyright terms and stimulate a competitive marketplace. The authors themselves were merely convenient instruments in a broader economic policy, swiftly transferring their newfound, temporary rights back to publishers in exchange for publication. Therefore, early copyright was less a philosophical awakening than a strategic economic tool deployed to regulate industry monopolies.

Based on the passages, which of the following statements accurately describe the joint primary purpose shared by both authors? Select all that apply.