Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Intellectual property rights : copyright
Intellectual property: quizlet
Intellectual property: quizlet
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Intellectual property rights : copyright
Let’s face it, copyright and intellectual property use is was one of the messiest, entangled webs between content owners, providers, and consumers. One of the biggest issues involved with copyright and intellectual property is with illegal infringement on use of property. I would venture to say that presently, the majority of people, under the age of 40, have been guilty of illegal use of such material.
Talking from personal experience, I have been a repeat infringer. Starting when I was in 8th grade, I would download music by using a Youtube to MP3 convertor. However, I never once used a site, like Limewire, to download music illegally. Even now, since I have access to free streaming services, like Spotify, I have no incentive to illegally download music.
On the other hand, movies are a
…show more content…
This is why I believe out of the three options, that Option One is the best solution. Changing the licensing scheme for copyright is not a perfect solution. But it is a step towards a compromise on both sides. Hypothetically with this option you could share copyright material with others.
Let’s take a movie you bought for example. With this new copyright scheme in place, in addition to the Blu-Ray disc, included would be a code for you or another to watch the movie online. There would be a set limit to how many times the code could be used, either by month or year. This would be similar to how people share a Netflix account, but it would come with a time limit.
For music, you could share an album with a friend and it would stay in that person’s music library for a set amount of time and then if they wanted, they could have the opportunity to buy it or just let it delete off of their library. The one problem with this solution is that it would be abused (i.e. someone would figure out how to keep the code active forever). Moreover, it wouldn’t necessarily stop everyone from illegally streaming/downloading
The central message of this text is that increasingly, outdated copyright laws are being manipulated and put to use in a ludicrous manner.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.
As many users see P2P software as just file sharing, entertainment industries and other big companies see it as copyright infringement and stealing from copyright owners without their rightful authorization or compensation. These companies complain that P2P file sharing threatens the survival of the industries and believe that there should be a law passed to protect the livelihood of the copyright holders.
While many suggest that music piracy is destroying the music industry, others claim that it is actually helping. On average, people who pirate music “legitimately purchase 30 percent more music than non-P2P (Peer to peer) users.” This is what Betsy Issacson claims (Issacson). Most of this music is copied from friends and families that bought it from a music store. In 18-29 year olds, this is where they get about 30% of their music from.
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.
“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).
Copyright, in its first form, was first introduced in 1710 with a British statute of Anne. Since this time copyright laws have changed to remain current, and have grown into an international agreement by many countries around the globe.
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 ...
Physical piracy-the copying and illegal sale of hard-copy CDs, videotapes, and DVDs-costs the music industry over $4 billion a year worldwide and the movie industry more than $3.5 billion. These numbers do not factor in the growing (and difficult to measure) problem of Internet piracy, in which music and movies are transferred to digital format and copies are made of the resulting computer file. Journalist Charles C. Mann explains why Internet piracy has the potential to be vastly more damaging to copyright industr...
There are a lot of people who download music and movies without paying. The main reason that this is such a big issue is because piracy substitutes for a legitimate transaction; for example, someone who would have originally bought a DVD of the movie Young Guns but instead downloads it for free on The Pirate Bay. In this case, the person pirating the movie or song would never have bought it. This happens frequently if the “pirate” lives in a relatively poor country, like China, and is simply unable to afford to pay for the films and music he or she downloa...
Just two decades ago, saying “copyright” to teachers most likely conjured images in their minds only of the fine-print notice in the front of a textbook. Today, with a world of Web 2.0 technology at their fingertips, copyright issues for teachers can be confusing and complex. Add to that an ever-increasing emphasis on technology literacy in our states’ education standards – forcing teachers to incorporate applications and resources that may be uncharted territory to them – and the waters get even murkier. Teachers bear the double-burden of carefully abiding by copyright laws in their day-to-day incorporation of technology in the classroom, while instilling copyright ethics in students as they meet state standards for technology and media literacy. A review of the copyright literature related to education provides some clarity on copyright and fair use applied to classroom practices, suggests barriers to copyright compliance among educators, and provides suggestions on how to teach copyright ethics to a tech-savvy generation.
The first reason why downloading and uploading copyrighted materials from the Internet should be legal is that downloading copyrighted materials positively affects the economy. The European Commission Joint Research Center reported that the profits of music companies would be 2% lower if uploading and downloading copyrighted materials were banned. However, music companies are able to acquire more profits despite illegal downloading because many people tend to purchase CDs or DVDs after watching or listening to copyrighted materials for free. Moreover, the research showed that people who download music illegally spent more money to buy music than people who did not download illegally. In addition, research conducted by the Swiss government informed that one-third of Swiss people downloaded copyrighted materials from the Internet because personal use of copyrighted materials is legal in Switzerland. Even though there is a fact that many people can download copyrighted materials from the Internet legally in Switzerland, the amount of money that people spend to buy copyrighted materials is not f...
All around the world, people connected to the internet are downloading free digital content through P2P file sharing software. Intellectual property rights are being violated as people are downloading free content through P2P (Peer 2 Peer) networks, and illegal websites online. Production companies can’t do anything about that because developers of this type of software can’t be blamed for what people share.
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
Copyright infringement is a major issue with media ethics. Many people confuse copyright infringement with trademark infringement (Miller, 2012). However, copyright infringement is when someone unlawfully uses a particular work that is protected by copyright law. These works can include: movies, pictures, songs, albums, artwork, pieces of literature, and newspapers. There is no reason for any of the previous to be copyright infringed, because there are ways to correctly cite all of them as sources, without illegally copyright infringing them. Most people simply do not use their resources to help them with their citing.
Not only is downloading this media illegal, it is also morally wrong. It is our responsibility to know the difference between right and wrong - downloading this media is something that shouldn’t be done. The artists that create the CDs pay a lot of money to make the CDs for our pleasure, and in return they expect everyone to pay for their CDs (its how they make their money). In this respect, downloading illegal music through peer to peer networks is the equivalent to stealing a CD from an actual store.