How can documentary heritage institutions protect the rights of publishers and creators while archiving their digital works for future generations? Is such an intervention of collecting, archiving and making available digital work justifiable and, if so, why? A legal deposit system is implemented in most national libraries to balance protecting rights holders and guaranteeing public interest. However, the expansion of collection coverage such as e-books and social media content has resulted in legal and ethical conflicts. Legal and economic approaches can convert legal conflicts into analysable trade-off phenomena. Therefore, we explore whether and to what extent economic reasoning applies to the legislative process. This is primarily for electronic legal deposit systems, specifically focusing on copyright and privacy issues. For copyright, legal deposits serve a public domain function and a correction function for market failures. Preserving the function of legal deposits can mitigate legal and ethical risks over time. However, such risks remain, as long as privacy is subjective and contextual. Even if documentary heritage institutions are granted legislative authority to collect digital work mandatorily, they must pursue other methods to minimise such risks. This suggests that collection coverage diversifies between countries and regions.

中文翻译：

---

法定缴存制度法经济学注

文献遗产机构如何在为后代存档数字作品的同时保护出版商和创作者的权利？这种收集、存档和提供数字作品的干预是否合理，如果是，为什么？大多数国家图书馆都实行法定缴存制度，以平衡保护权利人和保障公共利益。然而，电子书和社交媒体内容等馆藏覆盖范围的扩大导致了法律和道德冲突。法律和经济方法可以将法律冲突转化为可分析的权衡现象。因此，我们探讨经济推理是否以及在多大程度上适用于立法过程。这主要用于电子法定存款系统，特别关注版权和隐私问题。对于版权，法定存款具有公共领域功能和纠正市场失灵的功能。随着时间的推移，保留法定存款的功能可以降低法律和道德风险。然而，只要隐私是主观的和上下文相关的，这种风险仍然存在。即使文献遗产机构获得了强制收集数字作品的立法授权，它们也必须寻求其他方法来最大限度地减少此类风险。这表明收集范围在国家和地区之间存在差异。即使文献遗产机构获得了强制收集数字作品的立法授权，它们也必须寻求其他方法来最大限度地减少此类风险。这表明收集范围在国家和地区之间存在差异。即使文献遗产机构获得了强制收集数字作品的立法授权，它们也必须寻求其他方法来最大限度地减少此类风险。这表明收集范围在国家和地区之间存在差异。