Digital Rights and Wrongs: Intellectual Property - Term Paper Example

 A critique of the current arguments in the popular media regarding intellectual property Before introduction of digital technologies and Internet, absolute majority of ordinary citizens did not come across intellectual property rights. In the new millennium they cover different spheres of our life such as education, search and usage of information, music, watching movies, and even usage of home appliances. Modern society is highly informative; thus, value of digital, sound information, written documents and sources increases, as it can become a key to individual or commercial success. Internet websites, electronic libraries, proxy serves and forums are basic sources of information for students outside educational institutions. Issue of “copyrighted” material is on the agenda both for providers and users, as percentage of infringements in this sphere steadily grows. Discovering plagiarism in education, one should pay attention to sphere of copyright application. “Works covered by copyright include books, magazines, musical scores, motion pictures and computer software programs.” (Millonzi & Passannante 39 - 43) Writing term papers, dissertations, composing or technical projects, students require a large variety of information that must be properly cited. U.S. Copyright Office, the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), WIPO and other organizations regulate these legal matters and develop preventive measures against plagiarism of the copyrighted material. iParadigms, LLC created an online software Turnitin for detection of plagiarism in written paper of students and authors. On the international market this intellectual rights protection service is intended for schools, colleges and universities. The software assesses similarity of the works, using electronic libraries, published articles, web-sites etc. Nevertheless, Matthew Dames doubts high efficiency of the product and rejects using it in his practice, because even minimum similarities are unavoidable. “A student cannot have a genuine original thought that is independent of another’s writings. As a result, the service skews overwhelmingly toward the benefit of authors whose work and reputation already have been established.” (Dames 23 - 25) This argument is logically grounded, as search results of Turnitin are based on maximum coincidence of words and word combinations. To deal with the arisen problem in the United States, Copyright Office and Department of Education should improve assessment criteria of the written works. Firstly, tutors should provide students exceptionally with theoretic background. There is no need to give them dissertation or groundwork of the published/unpublished articles to avoid violation of copyright. Secondly, directorates of the educational institutions should explain students conditions of written works submission, value of individual creativity and copyrighted material, negative consequences and immorality of copyright infringements. Unfortunately, intellectual property rights are often ignored by young generation. According to the research of University Honor Council only 54% of US students regard copyrighted homework as cheating. Furthermore, 61% of students would report of the infringements revealed (The Daily Pennsylvanian, Download. Steal. Copy. Cheating at the University). These data proves a mixed attitude of youth towards copyright and results of intellectual labor. Thus, their legal nurturing is insufficient, that’s why the government and file-sharing companies should use efficient means to bring it up. At present numerous subpoenas and suits can be used as deterrents to demonstrate copyright at work. At the same time, developers of intellectual rights protection software should improve current screening algorithms to avoid mistakes and ambiguous situations. Trying to stimulate aspiration for knowledge and legal nurturing, universities often provide students with personal accounts or access to Internet. Students are supposed to use them to work in electronic libraries and look for required information within academic year. However this privilege is often broken, because the students use it for their individual needs, which break the copyright. For instance, they download MP3 and MP4 files from Napster, Kazaa, Grokster or OLGA. “The recording industry perceived the threat to be sufficiently great that on September 8, 2003, it did indeed begin suing individuals who shared music over Internet. Because the possible penalties for this kind of copyright infringement are quite high, the crackdown on just a few violators had a major deterrent impact.” (Bowie 77 - 96) For example, Annie Leith, who illegally downloaded circa 1000 songs from Kazaa, had to pay $3,000. RIAA v. US universities followed hundreds of suits against universities and particular individuals for downloading and sharing music. For this purpose they used university networks, proxy servers and dubious file-sharing sites. After such cases number of copyright infringements in particular spheres of Internet sharply decreases. These deterrents are especially efficient, if they will be followed by frenzy in mass media. As for motives of such infringement, the majority of the law breakers download music for their personal needs. They simply listen to it on MP3/CD players, computers, and radio-recorders and do not want to buy CD disks to get just several favorite songs. Their actions are motivated with desire to spare time and money, which can be used for other purposes. Such method is cheaper and quicker and is not considered as an illegitimate action. Many music file sharers do not even think of possible juridical consequences of their actions. On the one hand, MP3 files’ sharing seems to save consumers’ budget and redirect them for other purposes. On the other hand, it breaks the laws of commercial market. On the contrary to the existing stereotype, the recording companies with many-millioned income are not the only victims of the copyright infringers. “New venues like satellite radio, legitimate online music stores and social networking sites are opening an array of music options to new audiences - connecting listeners and creators in an ever-growing web of new relationships.” (ASCAP) The government and intellectual rights protection organizations support owners of music copyright, the recording companies, music stores and official website related to this sphere. At present an efficient competitors appeared for illegal file-sharing sites and servers. iTunes, developed by Apple, is a compromise between recording companies and those customers, who would like to save money and get their favorite songs officially. Due to iTunes it is possible to download 1 song per $0.99. Apple Corporation organized a large-scale advertising campaign for the product in order to introduce it to potential infringers. “As many as 80% of consumers would pay for downloads, as long as the service was simple and relatively cheap.” (Bowie 77 - 96) This strategy positively affects intellectual rights protection, as the number of the infringements sharply decreases within the next few years. There is another aspect of copyright infringement – rights of singers, songwriters, composers, producers and lyricists. Their incomes and way of life often depends on royalties from the written songs. Millions of file-sharing sites users unconsciously deprive these people of their legal incomes. Downloading “I Was a Lonely Girl” from Morpheus, a user does not think of damages incurred to Linda Leen or the songwriter. In this case, the interested party will hardly be able to persuade million target audience to remember of copyright, sharing files on official websites of buying CDs. Thus, they try to protect their rights either alone or through official organizations such as ASCAP. The main purpose of ASCAP is to clarify field of copyright application and protect rights of music creators on the commercial market. “As a “performing rights organization” or “PRO,” ASCAP has licensed and distributed royalties for the nondramatic public performances of copyrighted works created and owned by its members since its founding in 1914.” (ASCAP) It includes approximately 300,000 members. Music plagiarism is also motivated by desire for using downloaded music in one’s own projects, pieces of music etc. Plagiarists copy ideas, melodies of skillful artists and, thus, break intellectual property rights of the above music creators and recording companies. Their actions are motivated with the fact that usage of copyrighted music is not a theft. A set of sounds can not be regarded as theft. It makes such infringements psychologically easier and seems to justify the infringers before the society. Nevertheless, any piece of music contains ideas of its creator. This is the result of intellectual labor. Following example of his colleges, sing poet Billy Bragg removes his songs from MySpace, as the site creators have broken terms and conditions as to him. Thus, he tries to protect his intellectual property rights. Such innovative software as Freenet or Blubster are intended for protection of rights of singers and songwriters. Bibliography 1. Bowie, E. Norman. “Digital Rights and Wrongs: Intellectual Property in the Information Age”. Business and Society Review 110.1 (2005): 77 – 96. 2. Clarke-Pearson, Marie. “Download. Steal. Copy. Cheating at the University”. The Daily Pennsylvanian 48.11 (2001): 3. Web. Nov. 27, 2001. http://web.archive.org/web/20050305140307/www.dailypennsylvanian.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2001/11/27/3c03502bad345?in_archive=1 3. Dames, K. Matthew. “Turn You In: Scholarly Ethics in a Culture of Suspicion.” Information Today 25. 6 (2008): 23 - 25. 4. Millonzi, Kay & Passannante, William G. “Beware of the Pirates: How to Protect Intellectual Property.” Risk Management 43.8 (1996): 39 - 43. 5. United States. American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers. “Musical Copyright in The Digital Age: A Position Paper.” ASCAP, 10 March, 2008: http://www.ascap.com/rights Read More