Copyright is a way of creating an artificial monopoly for authors and inventors as a means to promote creative activity for the greater good of society as a whole. This monopoly is meant to be temporary. Yet we have seen the time allotted to authors, inventors, and media corporations extended to what seems far outside the range of anything that is primarily to the benefit of society as a whole. If I live to be seventy years old this particular blog will be protected under copyright law until 2123, that’s 113 years from now.
It is highly likely that corporations and the media conglomerates will continue lobby our government officials to extend copyright protection to infinity. It is easy to imagine at time when copyright monopoly will keep literature, music, art, and movies out of the public domain for 500 years and upwards. This will be tragic for society and the creation of culture to come. If this does happen, then the spirit behind the origins of copyright law is dead. Simply put, copyright law cannot take precedence over technological innovation. It is incredibly important for the world to reevaluate the importance of the original philosophy behind intellectual property and copyright law and how we can reacquire a healthy and vibrant public domain.
Perhaps, it is technology that will force us to do this. With the advent of the internet, legally or illegally, users are de-commodifying much of culture. Peer-to peer file sharing is good for creative artist because it lowers the cost of production, marketing, promotion, and distribution. Media companies should consider the possibilities of the internet's promise as a means for creative new ways to make profit. They should learn to capitalize on the changing technology and begin to let go of out dated business models. If artist and corporations wish to still be a part of this economy, then they must construct new models that benefit not only their own personal bank accounts but enrich and promote creation of new artistic works to the advantage of society as a whole.
Having a vital public domain and ensuring that laws continue to favor innovation over copyright for copyright’s sake is incredibly important. The Congress and the Court should not encourage media companies in pursuit of creating an oligopoly of information, distribution, and technological innovation.
3 comments:
If it's true that most authors want to get their ideas out there, then YES, for their sakes, the laws should loosen. Ideas shouldn't be copyrighted, but what about specific products? An ebook could be ripped and sent P2P, but it's still difficult to copy a printed book (even though it could be done - Harry Potter was ripped and uploaded as an ebook hours after its release without an ebook ever being made). More questions than answers...
-bk
I totally don't think people should just be able to rip off the products and creations of others. It's more of the issue of how long things should be protected...and it's not individual creators that continue to lobby for the extension of copyright protection it is large corporations. It's Disney trying to protect their precious Micky Mouse. At some point everything is supposed to reenter the pubic domain so that new ideas can be created off the ideas and creations that have come before.
I should have gone into copyright law. Seems like a growth industry these days, don't it?
Post a Comment