The Tyranny of Copyright
Based on my reading about copyright seems like it has become one of the hottest topics involving the internet. Understanding the meaning of copyright as in the dictionary “Copyright – symbolized “©” – is a legal concept, enacted by most governments, giving the creator of an original work exclusive rights to it, usually for a limited time. Generally, it is “the right to copy”, but also gives the copyright holder the right to be credited for the work, to determine who may adapt the work to other forms, which may perform the work, which may financially benefit from it, and other, related rights. It is an intellectual property form (like the patent, the trademark, and the trade secret) applicable to any expressible form of an idea or information that is substantive and discrete.” With a clear understanding of the meaning of the word, I return back to the article. There are several opinions, groups and laws that are mentioned on this specific article. One of several laws designed to protect copyrighted material on the Web is the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright act (D.M.C.A), which basically makes internet service provider liable for what is published in their sites. There are some specific cases mentioned in the article that included their outcomes in Court as they are called by Siva Vaidhyanathan “copyright horror stories”. Sometimes is really hard to understand if you don’t have the knowledge of what harm is done by just posting something in your web-page or other.
In a way I do agree with the Movies and Music industry, all the work to do lobbying to tighten the reins of downloads and copies. Based on the article seems like the movies and music industries is loosing terrain money wise, an unless they come up with an idea as to who to share the ideas and at the same time make some profits, they will be first one to go as Robert Boynton wrote it in the article. In 1998 there was an additional to the Digital millennium Copyright Act, the 1998 Copyright Term Extension Act that actually added 20 years of protection to past or present copyrighted work. Then you got the side that is actually defending the “Copy Left” or “free culture movement” this group is actually more open to the idea of sharing free resources with others. Is their opinion that copyright should be view more as to encourage innovation? The idea of the Cultural Commons seems like good solutions for seekers of information and a place where authors could have their items filed and share with others as the copyright term comes to an end.
As I see it after the way that the Copyright Law (or definition) has been written did not took into consideration all the innovations and changes that we will have, meaning the Internet. Lawmakers haven’t been able to come up with a solution to this dilemma and as we keep progressing it will be more difficult to come up with an answer to this dilemma. The organization funded by Lessig, Creative Commons offers new artist with a way to do their research without the worries of breaking the copyright laws. Is also a way in which authors could actually gain back, because as they post some of their writings, lyrics, music, or whatever it be they are actually being exposed to more people which at the same time will bring them technically a free public relations if you will.
