Since the beginning of the eighteenth century authors in England have had the exclusive rights to their own immaterial works (Bernitz, Gleisner, n.d.). However this was only at a primitive level with the act called the Statue of Anne, and the exclusive rights were only given to a small range of people and types of works (”Copyright Timeline[…]”, n.d.). Since these early copyright laws were written, they’ve been changed a lot and become more restrict, in addition to a wider range of works and with a worldwide use.
Nevertheless has some negative side effects raised from these restrictions. One of these is the fact that it in our digitalised world becomes very difficult to use works where the author are not known as you need to contact the author and ask if you are allowed to use her work. It is in these situations as the Creative Commons licenses will be significant.
Creative Commons, shortened CC, is a licensing system developed by the nonprofit organisation with the same name; Creative Commons. The organisation was founded in California, U.S., by the lawyer Lawrence Lessig, the publicist Eric Eldred and Hal Abelson, Professor in computer science at MIT (Af Schmidt, Klang, n.d.). Together, and with all people today working with Creative Commons, they have a mutual vision which states that ”Our vision is nothing less than realising the full potential of the Internet - universal access to research and education, full participation in culture - to drive a new era of development, growth, and productivity.” (”About”, Creativecommons.org, n.d.).
It all started in 2001 when Lawrence Lessig made a realisation. It was when he worked with a court case about copyrights and the disadvantages of these. He realised that he and his client w...
... middle of paper ...
...pyrights. The organisation Creative Commons was founded in 2001 and the first version of the licenses was published in 2002. Furthermore the organisation has expanded dramatically since the start and has today affiliates in more than 70 countries all over the world (”CC Affiliate Network”, Creativecommons.org, n.d.).Sources
Works Cited
”About” Creativecommons.org. Creative Commons, n.d. Web. 3 Nov. 2013
Af Schmidt, Klang. ”Upphovsrätt” Ne.se. Nationalencyklopedin, n.d. Web. 6 Nov. 2013
”CC Affiliate Network” Creativecommons.org. Creative Commons, n.d. Web. 8 Nov. 2013
”Copyright Timeline: A History of Copyright in the United States” arl.org. Association of Research Libraries, n.d. Web. 6 Nov. 2013
”Historien bakom Creative Commons” Youtube.com. Youtube, 3 May 2010. Web. 6 Nov 2013
”Historik” Creativecommons.se. Creative Commons Sverige, n.d. Web. 6 Nov 2013
Define and explain the following: copyrights, trademarks, and patents. Compare the three and provide an example of each. This paper will be non-graded, but it is still highly recommended that you complete this assignment for increased practice and self-improvement.
Prior to the enactment of the Statute of Anne in 1710, the idea of copyright law, remained in the private law context, was in hands of profit-making stationers' company who only served to uphold their own interests in printing the materials. The Statute of Anne deeply affected the American law of copyright (Patterson, 1965) marking the beginning of copyright in a public context. Although the Statute itself had handful of loopholes like it only governed the printing of books and did not stipulate any means to identify the author, it was still often referred as the most authoritative legislation document because of its groundbreaking, historical impact on its protection to the natural and property rights of authors. In my essay, the Copyright Ordinance in Hong Kong will be illustrated to show that it succeeded the spirit of Statute of Anne, favoring the vigorous and prospering development creative work in our city. I would also suggest some ways to amend the Law in the modern circumstances where Web 2.0 Communication Tools reinvented the creative industry significantly.
The central message of this text is that increasingly, outdated copyright laws are being manipulated and put to use in a ludicrous manner. This is resulting in the suppression of people’s ability to generate and share their own creative expressions.
Abstract: This paper discusses the ongoing court battle between the Motion Picture Association of America, supported by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and various defendants regarding the DeCSS program and its source code. DeCSS is a utility that allows the circumvention of the encryption built into most DVDs. Specifically, the paper examines the implications of the court decision on a range of issues including source code as free speech, HTML linking, and fair use.
and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right
Over the past decade the societal view of creative society has greatly changed due to advances in computer technology and the Internet. In 1995, aware of the beginning of this change, two authors wrote articles in Wired Magazine expressing diametrically opposed views on how this technological change would take form, and how it would affect copyright law. In the article "The Emperor's Clothes Still Fit Just Fine" Lance Rose hypothesized that the criminal nature of copyright infringement would prevent it from developing into a socially acceptable practice. Thus, he wrote, we would not need to revise copyright law to prevent copyright infringement. In another article, Entitled "Intellectual Value", Esther Dyson presented a completely different view of the copyright issue. She based many her arguments on the belief that mainstream copyright infringement would proliferate in the following years, causing a radical revision of American ideas and laws towards intellectual property. What has happened since then? Who was right? This paper analyzes the situation then and now, with the knowledge that these trends are still in a state of transformation. As new software and hardware innovations make it easier to create, copy, alter, and disseminate original digital content, this discussion will be come even more critical.
Intellectual Property Law used to only protect art, music, and literature, but because of technological development, Intellectual Property Law now also protects a greater variety of innovations including designs, inventions, symbols, discoveries, and words. The phrase “intellectual property” was first known to be used in the late 1700’s; however, it was not widely talked about, nor was the Intellectual Property Law in actuality commonly implemented. Intellectual Property Rights slowly gained more attention by mid-1800’s after the Industrial Revolution had taken place: more companies were created, competition between corporations became fiercer, and owning unique innovations were crucial to winning the competition. However, as Intellectual Property
“Copyright is a fundamental right of ownership and protection common to all of the arts” (O’Hara & Beard, 2006, p. 8). “It is a form of intellectual Property (IP)” and it gives the owner exclusive rights to the copyright (O’Hara & Beard, 2006, p. 11).
Love, James, and Tim Hubbard. "Paying for public goods." Code: Collaborative ownership and the digital economy (2005): 207-229.
The Statute of Anne (the first modern form of copyright law) was introduced after the printing press was invented. Before this time, books would have to be hand written and for this reason they were ve...
Intellectual property is property resulting from intellectual, creative processes. A product that was created because of someone’s individual thought process. Examples includes books, designs, music, art work, and computer files. (Miller R. J., 2011, p. 114) In the music industry a copyright is an important tool for artist to use to protect themselves from infringers. A copyright is the exclusive right of an author or originator of a literary or artistic production to publish, print, or sell that production for a statutory period of time. A copyright has the same monopolistic nature as a patent or trademark, but it differs in that it applies exclusively to works of art, literature, and other works of authorship (including computer programs). (Miller R. J., 2011, p. 125)
Because of its intangible nature, and particularly the increase of the digital domain and the internet as a whole, computers and cyber piracy make it easier for people to steal many forms of intellectual property. Due to this major threat, intellectual property rights owners’ should take every single measure to protect their rights. Unless these rights are either sold, exchanged, transferred, or appropriately licensed for use in exchange for a monetary fee, they should be protected at all cost. In order to protect these rights, the federal and states governments have passed numerous laws and statutes to protect intellectual property from misappropriation and infringement. “The source of federal copyright and patent law originates with the Copyright and Patent ...
We have to remind legislators that intellectual property rights are a socially-conferred privilege rather than an inalienable right, that copying is not always evil (and in some cases is actually socially beneficial) and that there is a huge difference between wholesale piracy'the mass-production and sale of illegal copies of protected worksand the filesharing that most internet users go in for.
In its simplest terms, copyright is the U.S. government’s way of protecting the rights of anyone creating an original work, such as a play, song, poem, book, or artwork. Only the work’s original author or creator can make copies, distribute, sell, perform or adapt that work. Originally passed into law 35 years ago, the Copyright Act of 1976 has undergone many changes in the wake of advancing technology, including such changes as categorizing any work on the Internet as “published” (Copyright Act of 1976). Of
However, in recent years, it is not uncommon to see copyright in the possession of a third party other than the creator. These companies make use of copyright as an investment and financial tools to gain profit. In this case, the use of copyright loses its original purpose of protecting the creator, but used as a mean for financial gain. This could possibly hinder creativity as innovation becomes a financial tool catered to the tastes of the general public, while the less marketable new ideas goes unnoticed by the general public under the copyright laws. It is crucial to note that online platforms such as blogs, Facebook and Youtube, and people making their music/works available online for free shows the rapid surge in the number of people willing to sacrifice their copyrights to market themselves to the world. In this highly saturated market, copyright laws can become less relevant as marketing and business is placed on higher