About Me

My photo
I'm stuck in a world of questions and "sane insanity".

Friday, February 2, 2007

QotW3:The Flaws of Laws in copyright



In the 1700s, the seas off the coast of major trading ports were terrorized by what we know as pirates who ruthlessly robbed merchant’s ships and unsuspecting towns. The concept of stealing trade goods from its rightful owners and later selling it off for profit is not just a thing of the past. Besides, experiencing such acts in the form of movies and books, a new kind of piracy has emerged over the years. Although not as violent as the robbery mentioned above, the piracies of intellectual property, rob individuals of their sense of achievement. It is because of such acts, that laws on piracy have been passed.

Before I proceed as to what could be done to accommodate the content creators and public good, it is important to look at some of the different kinds of trespasses that play a major role in exploiting the copyright laws. A major debatable issue which has erupted over the past few years would be the usage of music sharing capabilities such as “Limewire” and “Napster”. According to Oberholzer-Gee and Strumpf in their empirical analysis of “The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales” mentions that more then 60 million Americans have downloaded music and the number of file sharers are growing. Similar to this large numbers, I too have done my own fair share of downloading, but sometimes, it does make me think, is it right to receive free music over the internet and deprive musical artistes of earning for their hard work?

To look into this, copyright laws implemented, ensures creators of intellectual property exclusive rights to their own work. According to the US constitution article 1 section 8, clause 8, the law states “
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”. As seen from this constitutional law, not only are creative writings and arts protected by this, but also scientific discoveries and theories. Besides the exclusive rights to their own works, the copyright law serves as a platform to benefit the public indirectly. Why is this so? The answer is simple. Because creators benefit financially from owning the exclusive rights, it provides incentives to them to carry on creating, thus benefiting the public in the long run.


It is with this, that I shall discuss the main issue involved. How can we accommodate both content creators and the public? As mentioned before, many internet users have or would at one point of time use the internet to download pirated software. To some it serves as the best way to save money, for example if they want just a few songs, downloading it would be more cost effective rather than to purchase the CD itself. However, although this would benefit them, it would not benefit the creator as millions of dollars may be lost. So what technical structure can be implemented to stop the act of piracy? Copy protection also known as copy restriction has been enforced to serve as a measure to prevent the duplication of information. (Wikipedia, 07) However, software companies have been known to produce and provide a newer technology which enables individuals to avoid copy protection software. However a social structure which rebutted this was the implementation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) which made it illegal for companies to provide such technologies. (Wikipedia,07).

Although many laws have come into effect, a frequent argument which many software companies make is that the way their programs are used by their users is of no problem of theirs. However, this should not be the case. As seen from the Grokster incident, it is essential that companies do not encourage users to break the copyright law. Also companies may be expected to implement features which could inhibit infringing uses according to Kevin S Brady.

With all this said, the question still lies on what measures can be taken to accommodate both parties. As mentioned above, until this point of time, it is impossible for any steps to be taken without either party feeling the brunt of it. If stricter laws were imposed on those who infringe copyright laws, the public would definitely not benefit. However, if laws were slackened, the content creators would “lose” out and in a worst case scenario as mentioned before, lose their motivation to continue creating for the public thus causing a domino effect which would not benefit anybody. It is with this inevitable circumstance that the best way which would benefit both parties would be, reduce the aim of profit making. As understood by some, aside from the profits made by the creator ie: songwriters, bands, etc. Large corporations in charge of these creators for example aim to maximize their profits further by raising prices of CDs. This as mentioned, forces individuals to turn to illegal downloading as a way to cut cost. If prices of such items were lowered, people would most likely find it reasonable to “pay to support” their favorite bands rather then pay so that corporation owners can get richer. This would also apply to other piracy acts such as illegal DVDs and VCDs.

To apply this to the practical world, a friend of mine whose band recently released a CD once said, the cost of producing a CD is probably not even half of what it is sold for. The majority of the money goes to the record label and to the shops to make profits. Besides this, I have heard numerous people mention that it is cheaper to buy two to three pirated movies, than to go to the cinemas and watch one.

In conclusion, it is impossible to make everyone happy in a rapidly growing industry where profit making is a priority. However, I feel that as a consumer it is also a necessity to understand the reasons as to why people carry on to flaunt copyright laws although strict punishments have been implemented. I believe that there is only a certain amount of technical preventions which can be created. As seen, no matter what software is created, a loophole has always been found in it. Thus it is of importance that the only real solution to this would be for both content creators and the public to understand the issues and reasons behind such piracy acts and to work on it.

References:

Brady, K.S (2004,0215). Kevin S, Brady, Attorney of the law-Copyright Myths and Misconceptions. Retrieved February 1, 2007, from Copyright FAQ: 25 Common Myths and Misconceptions Web site: http://users.goldengate.net/%7Ekbrady/copyright.html

Oberholzer-Gee, F, & Strumpf, K (2005). The Effect Of File Sharing On Record Sales. Retrieved February 1, 2007, from http://www.unc.edu/%7Ecigar/papers/FileSharing_June2005_final.pdf.

Ovalle, C (2005). An introduction to copyright. Retrieved 01,1,007, from
http://sentra.ischool.utexas.edu/~i312co/1.php

(2007). Digital Millenium Copyright Act. In Wikipedia [Web]. Retrieved 01312007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act

(2007). Copyright. In Wikipedia [Web]. Retrieved 02012007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

3 comments:

Ho Viet Hai said...

derek, plz change color. You gonna kill Mr Kevin's eyes

Rek said...

thanks Mr ho for the advice =p

Kevin said...

Looks fine to me... "full grades awarded" kind of fine. Note though that corporate and public understanding is an ideal, which could manifest as a new legislation or framework. There are some solutions in the readings, but I wanted to see how creative students can get.