The Copyright Dilemma in Digital World
Is digital technology a benefit or detriment today? Evidently, digital technology has given us the ability to obtain a large pool of information easily at low cost as well as to create, modify, and distribute information on a large extent, which once thought to be impossible in the past. This advantage, however, has actually turned out to be a major threat to the balance between the public and private domain in our society nowadays along the increase of piracy, particularly in the entertainment industry. Simply with an Internet access, people can download their favorite song, video, or movie by using peer-to-peer file sharing software such as Kazaa or Morpheus in a few minute without going to the physical music store or even paying any royalties to the creators. This, in fact, has resulted in million of dollars lost in lawsuits on copyright infringement in the U.S. every year. Therefore, in my opinion, instead of controlling the access to and use on copyright work, we should modify copyright law in accordance to changes in the society to maintain the equilibrium of interests between the content creators and the public domain.
Is the Current “Balance” Too Rigid?
Copyright law is the balance between the interest of both the public and the creators with its purpose to advancing the progress of learning and knowledge by promoting the production and distributing “works of authorships” (Litman, 2004, pg. 13). The public benefits from the innovation works from the creators, who then benefit from their creations’ royalties, which provide them incentives to continue their creativity in the society. However, the change of digital technology actually tipped off that balance as it has made easy for creative works from the private domain to distribute freely in the public as Rebecca Martin remarked, “digital technology has blurred the boundaries of artistic ownership” (Catapult, 2007). Responding to the emergence of digital technology, the U.S. Congress has changed the Copyright Act to Digital Millennium Copyright Act in 1998 to incorporate copyright in the digital world. Furthermore, it also made the U.S. copyright law more restrictive to improve the copyright protection especially with the introduction of Digital Rights Management - DMR, new software developed to control access or uses of a digital work (i312, 2007). However, copyright infringement still increases and spreads widely throughout the country (Lohmann, 2004). In fact, it is true as Howkins has said that piracy rises from the way the law executes in society, “A society where we’re able to download and store ideas, text, images, and sounds, and the way we feel we’re doing something morality, ethically, and socially ok, not something legally illegitimate” (Catapult, 2007).
From Controlling to Sharing through Copyright Licensing
With the widespread of digital technology, controlling access to copyrighted works seems futile in society today. By using the software, DMR, copyright infringement and piracy issue would not be controlled effectively. Moreover, DMR now has created a major risk on the user’s privacy. Thus, in my opinion, instead of putting a brake on the public’s access to and use on the creators’ works, we should provide voluntary copyright to maintain the interests of both the creators and the public good. An example is using copyright license, whish is set up an organization with the approval from the government in different standardized set of regulation. The license will give creators the liberty to set criteria in how they want their public use or modify their works. Besides, this also provides the public opportunities to contribute ideas on creator’s original works because the spread and development of creative work in society depend not only on the creators but also the public at large. Indeed, this idea has been launched and implemented gradually in society over the past few years like Creative Commons (CC).
Creative Commons was a non-profit organization that is started by Lawrence Lessig, a law professor at Stanford Law School along with other lawyers at Stanford in 2001 with the purpose to provide the public with high-quality legal licenses and instructions on their use (Kelty, 2005). Creative Commons set out a standard set of copyright licenses so that artists can easily grant limited rights distributors or public users and specify conditions through a voluntary “some rights reserve” approach (ComputerWorld, 2006). In addition, a third party may use the work legitimately without having to contact the creators for permission. Creative Commons are also applicable both for the online and offline works with a notification “This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License”. Today, Creative Commons have received a wide application not only in the U.S. but also all over the world. Till 2005, Creative Commons has provided licenses for 26 countries (Kay Russell, 2006).
In conclusion, in a rapid growth of digital technology, it is hard to control copyright by just using a software application or monetary charges. More importantly, copyright law should be modified constantly with the consideration of changes in economic, technological, and social environment. In fact, during this revolution of digital technology, a flexible copyright law would be essential to preserve the balance of interests between the public and private domain.
References
Carlos Ovalle. (2005). Copyright in Digital Environment. i312 Information in Cyberspace. Retrieved 23:30, January 30, 2007, from http://sentra.ischool.utexas.edu/~i312co/2.php
Catapult. (2007). Remix Culture: A Rights NightMare. Indepth. ABC Online. Retrieved 22:10, January 30, 2007 from http://www.abc.net.au/catapult/indepth/s1645533.htm
Fred von Lohmann. (2004, September 29). Is Suing Your Customers a Good Idea? Retrieved 21:10, February 1, 2007, from http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1095434496352
Jessica Litman. (2004, September 20). Formalities and Default Rules. Sharing and Stealing. Pg. 13. Retrieved 22: 45, February 1, 2007, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=472141
Kay, Russell. (2006, May 22). Technology - Creative Commons. ComputerWorld. Vol. 40 Issue 21, p34-34, 1p. Retrieved 20:50, February 2, 2007 from http://web.ebscohost.com.gate.lib.buffalo.edu/bsi/pdf?vid=59&hid=121&sid=126b7e6d-eb68-4273-981d-0ffba90848e6%40sessionmgr109
Kelty, Christopher M. (2004). Anthropological Quarterly 77:3:. Retrieved 22:15, February 2, 2007 from http://muse.jhu.edu.libproxy.sim.edu.sg/journals/anthropological_quarterly/v077/77.3kelty02.html
Is digital technology a benefit or detriment today? Evidently, digital technology has given us the ability to obtain a large pool of information easily at low cost as well as to create, modify, and distribute information on a large extent, which once thought to be impossible in the past. This advantage, however, has actually turned out to be a major threat to the balance between the public and private domain in our society nowadays along the increase of piracy, particularly in the entertainment industry. Simply with an Internet access, people can download their favorite song, video, or movie by using peer-to-peer file sharing software such as Kazaa or Morpheus in a few minute without going to the physical music store or even paying any royalties to the creators. This, in fact, has resulted in million of dollars lost in lawsuits on copyright infringement in the U.S. every year. Therefore, in my opinion, instead of controlling the access to and use on copyright work, we should modify copyright law in accordance to changes in the society to maintain the equilibrium of interests between the content creators and the public domain.
Is the Current “Balance” Too Rigid?
Copyright law is the balance between the interest of both the public and the creators with its purpose to advancing the progress of learning and knowledge by promoting the production and distributing “works of authorships” (Litman, 2004, pg. 13). The public benefits from the innovation works from the creators, who then benefit from their creations’ royalties, which provide them incentives to continue their creativity in the society. However, the change of digital technology actually tipped off that balance as it has made easy for creative works from the private domain to distribute freely in the public as Rebecca Martin remarked, “digital technology has blurred the boundaries of artistic ownership” (Catapult, 2007). Responding to the emergence of digital technology, the U.S. Congress has changed the Copyright Act to Digital Millennium Copyright Act in 1998 to incorporate copyright in the digital world. Furthermore, it also made the U.S. copyright law more restrictive to improve the copyright protection especially with the introduction of Digital Rights Management - DMR, new software developed to control access or uses of a digital work (i312, 2007). However, copyright infringement still increases and spreads widely throughout the country (Lohmann, 2004). In fact, it is true as Howkins has said that piracy rises from the way the law executes in society, “A society where we’re able to download and store ideas, text, images, and sounds, and the way we feel we’re doing something morality, ethically, and socially ok, not something legally illegitimate” (Catapult, 2007).
From Controlling to Sharing through Copyright Licensing
With the widespread of digital technology, controlling access to copyrighted works seems futile in society today. By using the software, DMR, copyright infringement and piracy issue would not be controlled effectively. Moreover, DMR now has created a major risk on the user’s privacy. Thus, in my opinion, instead of putting a brake on the public’s access to and use on the creators’ works, we should provide voluntary copyright to maintain the interests of both the creators and the public good. An example is using copyright license, whish is set up an organization with the approval from the government in different standardized set of regulation. The license will give creators the liberty to set criteria in how they want their public use or modify their works. Besides, this also provides the public opportunities to contribute ideas on creator’s original works because the spread and development of creative work in society depend not only on the creators but also the public at large. Indeed, this idea has been launched and implemented gradually in society over the past few years like Creative Commons (CC).
Creative Commons was a non-profit organization that is started by Lawrence Lessig, a law professor at Stanford Law School along with other lawyers at Stanford in 2001 with the purpose to provide the public with high-quality legal licenses and instructions on their use (Kelty, 2005). Creative Commons set out a standard set of copyright licenses so that artists can easily grant limited rights distributors or public users and specify conditions through a voluntary “some rights reserve” approach (ComputerWorld, 2006). In addition, a third party may use the work legitimately without having to contact the creators for permission. Creative Commons are also applicable both for the online and offline works with a notification “This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License”. Today, Creative Commons have received a wide application not only in the U.S. but also all over the world. Till 2005, Creative Commons has provided licenses for 26 countries (Kay Russell, 2006).
In conclusion, in a rapid growth of digital technology, it is hard to control copyright by just using a software application or monetary charges. More importantly, copyright law should be modified constantly with the consideration of changes in economic, technological, and social environment. In fact, during this revolution of digital technology, a flexible copyright law would be essential to preserve the balance of interests between the public and private domain.
References
Carlos Ovalle. (2005). Copyright in Digital Environment. i312 Information in Cyberspace. Retrieved 23:30, January 30, 2007, from http://sentra.ischool.utexas.edu/~i312co/2.php
Catapult. (2007). Remix Culture: A Rights NightMare. Indepth. ABC Online. Retrieved 22:10, January 30, 2007 from http://www.abc.net.au/catapult/indepth/s1645533.htm
Fred von Lohmann. (2004, September 29). Is Suing Your Customers a Good Idea? Retrieved 21:10, February 1, 2007, from http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1095434496352
Jessica Litman. (2004, September 20). Formalities and Default Rules. Sharing and Stealing. Pg. 13. Retrieved 22: 45, February 1, 2007, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=472141
Kay, Russell. (2006, May 22). Technology - Creative Commons. ComputerWorld. Vol. 40 Issue 21, p34-34, 1p. Retrieved 20:50, February 2, 2007 from http://web.ebscohost.com.gate.lib.buffalo.edu/bsi/pdf?vid=59&hid=121&sid=126b7e6d-eb68-4273-981d-0ffba90848e6%40sessionmgr109
Kelty, Christopher M. (2004). Anthropological Quarterly 77:3:. Retrieved 22:15, February 2, 2007 from http://muse.jhu.edu.libproxy.sim.edu.sg/journals/anthropological_quarterly/v077/77.3kelty02.html
Lawrence Lessig. (2005, October). The Public Domain. Foreign Policy. September/October Issue 150, p48-49, 2p. Retrieved 15:30, February 2, 2007, from http://web.ebscohost.com.gate.lib.buffalo.edu/bsi/pdf?vid=58&hid=121&sid=126b7e6d-eb68-4273-981d-0ffba90848e6%40sessionmgr109
1 comment:
Proposed a flexible copyright act and showcase Creative Commons as a viable solution. Full grade awarded.
Post a Comment