The rapid development of technology over the past few centuries has certainly left an impact on the world of halacha¸ or Jewish Law. Poskim, the formulators of the halacha, have had to make decisions on a variety of topics to accommodate fast-paced advancements in areas ranging from travel (When does one crossing the International Date Line celebrate a holiday?) to home appliances (Under what circumstances may one use a refrigerator on the Sabbath?). One issue that has been particularly relevant in recent years is that of digital piracy. The ubiquity of personal computers, the Internet, and the spread of peer-to-peer programs like Napster and BitTorrent have made a never-ending stream of media accessible to many Orthodox Jews. Naturally, this has kindled an interest in the matter of copyright. Does Jewish Law provide any protection to the author of an original work? What are the halachic implications of violating a copyright?
These questions were particularly troubling to me, as I am an avid pirate, regularly sharing gigabytes of music, movies, and software a week. Of course, as a practicing Orthodox Jew, I wanted to be sure that I was not violating any halachic prohibitions. Thus began my voyage through the vast sea of Jewish Law for clarity on this issue.
Soon after starting this project, though, it became clear that there would be no simple answer to these questions. Most of the rabbinic literature on the topic of intellectual property rights deals with physical media such as books and audio tapes. How these rulings apply to digital piracy is not always obvious. Furthermore, many of the responsa are terse and cryptic. This is increasingly frustrating when the rabbis, as they often do, disagree with each other. F...
... middle of paper ...
...on the intangibility of the scent. Similarly, Rabbi Bleich argues, the bits of data travelling between two computers are intangible and therefore not subject to the laws of theft (Reichman).
Since Rabbi Bleich is the only source dealing directly with the case of digital piracy, he is difficult to refute. It should be noted, though, that he omits, like Rabbi Wosner, a discussion of dina d’malchuta dina. Presumably, this principle could apply even to cases with intangible property.
Conclusion
Often, the greatest of halachic deciders end their responses with the words tzarich iyun, meaning that further study is required before a clear-cut conclusion can be drawn. I have seen how a modern question can branch out into so many areas of halacha. Since I have yet to become an expert in all of these fields, I cannot confidently choose a side of the debate. Tzarich iyun.
Taking a global perspective, one must keep in mind that the term “copyright” is not universally defined, accepted, or enforced. We must therefore use the term with the United State’s definition as a basis. However, absent U.S. law, we must also consider the creator’s intent as it relates to the distribution and use of his or her work. This exploration will lead us to a universal position – one that claims that the wide-scale, free exchange of Intellectual Property by means of P2P technology is unethical.
However, despite the strong copyright policy and punishment of the United States Federal Copyright Act, as enforced by police as well as the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), piracy still rages on, especially...
The evolution of the Internet into a mainstream resource has provided its users with access to whatever their hearts desire, often at no cost. Such free access has instilled in the minds of users that they are entitled to possess all that they may obtain, without regard to those from whom they are taking. Causing the damages to our economy and society on a global scale, and challenges to the current state of copyright law, resulting from the growth and advancement of digital technology, which has created a pandemic of apathy among an entire population of users toward the interests of copyright owners.
It is first beneficial to know the definition of piracy. Piracy has been characterized multiple ways from multiple disciplines. For the purpose of this paper, I will apply the definition of piracy from the 1982 United ...
Theodore Roosevelt once said, “ No people is wholly civilized where a distinction is drawn between stealing.” This quote can relate to the problem that has been going on against the piracy that has been occurring for many years. It has been occurring more now since it has been becoming easier to get access to certain files online. Personally, I think that people should be prosecuted for piracy because it is illegal, morally not right, and it causes many problems for composers.
Online piracy is being a threat to the business of the music, movie, and software industries. From Dictionary.com (n.d.), the definition of piracy is the unauthorized reproduction or use of a copyrighted book, recording, television program, patented invention, trademarked product. The focus of this paper is in the music, software, and e-book industries.
Internet-based file-sharing systems are gaining popularity, and consequently the sharing of copyrighted materials has become rampant. Fueled by server-based systems such as FreeDrive and peer-to-peer systems such as Napster, copyrighted materials are being propagated all over the Internet, and while shutting down such systems seems to answer some of these problems, it is in no way a complete solution. By examining these file-sharing systems and the legal issues that envelope them, more appropriate regulatory means may be discovered.
Piracy is the internationally recognized word to describe this type of theft. Dealing with piracy and there about such downloaders putting their hands in the pockets of Europe’s creative writers, musicians and performers and stealing their copyright income, for example, not to speak of the quantity of fake and often dangerous medicines and drugs on the market. Today the production of counterfeit and pirated products is carried out on an industrial scale.
“The law has not caught up with technology, but it will.” These words were said by Dr. Lentz during a lecture, that she probably doesn't remember, in the Fall of 2012. However, an argument can be made against these wise words that the law has already begun to catch up with technology. Technology law is becoming a fast growing area of legal study and practice in this country. There are multiple cases pertaining to this area, such as Brown vs. E.M.A. and PSINet Inc. vs. Chapman, and mountains of legislation, both federal and state. Many of technology law issues affect not only average ordinary citizens, but also the “deviant” subcultures that have emerged as a result of the electronic age in which we live. In these subcultures things like high speed Internet connectivity and the ability to host large amounts of data are prized. In the pirate and hacker subcultures there is a hierarchy that is based on the level of technical skill and the amount of files that are shared. Those with a high level of technical skill, who readily break copyright law and share files and provide file sharing services are given a high level of respect. Those individuals are called “citizens” by the rest of the community because they disseminate pirated materials to the rest of the community and work to better the community as a whole instead of focusing on their own desires. At the bottom of the hierarchy are “leeches,” those who just leech off of the pirated materials provided by a “citizen” and do little to augment the pirate community. (Holt & Copes, 2010) Many pirate communities use a file sharing technology called bittorenting. “This technology involves the simultaneous upload (sending files to others—called ‘‘seeding’’) and download (receiving files f...
Once upon a time a website provided free music through peer-to-peer file sharing. This was a new technology for the public for a several reasons. The price of home computers had declines dramatically and many people could now afford one. Because of the affordability, many people who had never used a computer suddenly found themselves enmeshed in the new media. Not only could people do their e-mail, do paperwork, play games and use all the different applications they now could also share their files with others. Of course, they wanted to share one of our most valued pleasures, our love of music. The public was not aware that this type of file sharing was illegal because it was not clear on the website disclaimer. Most people did not understand United States copyright laws or the concept of Fair Use. It was the golden age of the internet and everyone was happy with his or her new toy. In this paper, I will discuss legal implications of peer-to-peer file sharing. The most famous case was the Napster lawsuits. I was interested because I got a cease and desist letter spring 2000. I stopped but I never quite understood what the difference was between file-sharing and recording music off the radio, which I later learned was illegal also. This paper will explore if the current copyright laws provide the protection necessary for intellectual property. If not, does it need to be revised? Can the Fair Use Doctrine and the new technology co-exist in the same world?
Copyright materials involve everything like songs, movies, TV shows, photographs, magazines, books, software, plays and websites that should have a copyright protection. The copyright law is the exclusive right to make copies of another individual’s work. The law states that files cannot be shared, copied and performed without the individual permission, as a reason of ethical issues and it is illegal to share files that have copyright protection (TopTenREVIEWS, 2014).
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.
Piracy is primarily a problem for the entertainment and software industries, and therefore piracy most often involves violations of copyright law. Copyright is a legal right that protects creative works from being reproduced, performed, or disseminated without permission of the copyright owner. Essentially, a copyright gives its owner the exclusive right to make copies of the material in question.
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
Many people who use the Internet regularly have downloaded some kinds of copyrighted materials such as music and movies. However, should it be illegal to protect copyrighted materials more strictly? Today, downloading and sharing copyrighted materials is illegal in many countries such as Japan and the United States. In fact, people who share copyrighted materials get fines or jail sentences. For example, according to Yahoo Movies, a man from Gunma Prefecture in Japan was arrested for uploading a movie, the Wind Rises, in 2014. Nevertheless, downloading and sharing copyrighted materials should be legal for the economic growth and for artists.