Copyright Law Should Encourage Creativity And Innovation Essay

Anyone accused of copyright infringement is protected under the claim of Fair use as long as they stayed within the fair use guidelines; the borrowed work must be used for the following reasons: Education, Critique, Parody or commentary. Professor Faden has been wrongly accused of Copyright infringement over his “Fair(y) Use Tale” video by Disney, accusing him of stealing their Intellectual Property for his own personal gain. This paper will prove Professor Faden’s innocence and why his video should be allowed to stay online.

The Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 established that copyright terms now expire 70 years after the creator’s death, which is a 20-year extension from the previous copyright law in 1976 that established term expiration 50 years after the creator’s death. The Act applies equally to future works and works with existing copyrights. The court in Eldred v. Ashcroft upheld the CTEA as a rational exercise of congressional authority in that the copyright extension creates a significant benefit: encouraging copyright authors to produce more creative works. However, the extension has little influence on the motivation of authors to create and it constructs roadblocks in the creation process. Overall, the expected outcome of the 20-year copyright term extension is a reduction in the number of works being created and copyrighted in the future due to the increased costs of production. Without works entering the public domain, the copyright owner monopolizes their work, creating social costs associated with a monopoly market failure. The CTEA should be struck down as it is inconsistent with the ultimate goal of copyright law, which is to promote the

2.3 Define the Establishment of a Copyright - Peoples have a right to make copies and other exploit musical artistic work and literary works. This law was established to be in effect after January 1, 1978 The product of someone is protected, even 70 years after the person’s death.

Stop! Do you know what you're doing? Do you know who you're affecting? I bet you didn't know that your online pirating habit is affecting everyone, including you!

As time goes by, the rate at which art changes increases at a seemly exponential rate. Our culture

Copyright law is broken. I advocate for the alteration of copyright law as it relates to sampled music. My argument is this: Anybody should be allowed to use any samples they want, but must give credit and a portion of the profits made from the work to the sampled musicians.

There are many issues with the current copyright laws that exist in the Canada and the United States today. Many critics of these laws like, Creative Commons founder Lawrence Lessig; believe that current copyright laws only exist to protect entrenched, and often uncreative interests at the expense of everyone else. (Plotkin) In the United States, back in 1790, copyright extended for 14 years after the document was published, and then for another 14 years if the author was still alive. (Plotkin) Today copyright laws in the US have been lengthened to 70 years after the death of the author, which means that companies can withhold releasing works into the public domain for almost a century. (Plotkin) In Canada copyright laws are similar, but instead of 70 years after death, an authors works are released into the public domain 50 years after their death. (Harris) Lessig has stated in interviews that current copyright and patent practices are contrary to the reason why they were developed in the first place. (Plotkin) They were

The topic of public domain is becoming increasingly important in the modern day. Legislation once enacted to protect the intellectual property of the individual seems to have been flipped on its head to do the exact opposite. Copyright was originally created to inspire original works by individual authors, inventors and scientists for a relatively finite amount of time. In the modern era, we see big corporate interests pushing for the extension of these deadlines while buying and hoarding copyrights, using lawyers as guard dogs. Doing so infringes on the consumer's right to choose. Such actions prevents fair competition in terms of price, quality, and service for an obscene amount of time. Many famous icons all the way from Uncle Sam to Santa

First, all the necessary background information will be provided. Terms such as copyright, copyright infringement, copyright takedown, and fair use will be defined. The definitions for these terms were found in Richard Stim’s book, Copyright Law. Not only will this paragraph define these terms, but it will also put them in historical context. It is important when dealing with a particular law to know its development through time and how it has reacted to changes in society, technology, and the economy. The main source of historical knowledge of copyright law comes from the book, A Short History of Copyright: The Genie of Information by Benedict Atkinson and Brian FitzGerald. After giving the reader the proper framework to understand the claim, the paper will go on to outline the different issues that plague our current system. Most of the information for this section of the paper will come from two sources: Anna Woelfel’s dissertation, “Copyright v. Creativity: The Chilling Effect of U.S. Copyright Law on Artistic Expression" and Lydia Pallas Loren’s paper, "Deterring Abuse of the Copyright Takedown Regime by Taking Misrepresentation Claims Seriously." This section’s main areas of focus will be highlighting the serious problem false takedown claims, and the impact that the United States’ faulty copyright system is having on artistic expression. The final section of the paper will propose the solutions to solve the aforementioned problems. Each suggestion that was made in the thesis will be explained one by one to show why they are the correct course of action. Anna Woelfel’s dissertation and Lydia Pallas Loren’s paper will both be cited heavily for this part of the paper as well, along with "A Call for Copyright Reform" by Emily Toronto and Stephen G. Wood. This will be followed by a critique of opposing reform suggestions made by Joel Boehm in "Copyright Reform for the Digital Era: Protecting

The final years of the nineteenth century saw a move from this formulation of copyright to a broader one. The later definition of copyright included not only the protected work in its published form, but also in its substance, therefore magnifying the control afforded to the copyright holder. Copyright laws were extended to include photographs in 1884, and musical recordings in 1971 (Fisher 2). Since their American inception, copyrights have grown too with regards to the window of protection afforded the author. Instead of the original fourteen years, copyrights today now endure longer than the author of the works they protect. A copyright issued now lasts for the life of the author, and then another fifty years (Fisher 2).

The Walt Disney company, is a beloved as well as infamous company worldwide also notoriously known for their strict copyright laws. Original American copyright laws stated artistic works were protected for 28 years and these laws were eventfully extended to a 56-year time frame. The term continues to increase with the present law set at 75 years. Large companies like Disney continue to fight for stricter and longer laws because of the revenue they will continue to bring it. (Washington post). One apparent problem from the extensions is public lacks the ability to build on Disney stories since they are not in public domain. In the 1997 report

This essay will first examine how copyright law has attempted to be strengthened in New Zealand, and whether that has succeeded in preventing piracy. Next, how New Zealand’s current copyright law stifles creativity will be examined, with comparison to the United States jurisdiction. Lastly, the benefits of reform regarding ‘fair use’ will be discussed. Due to word constraints, examples of creativity will be limited to parody within Pop Art.

Copyright laws are intended to protect the intellectual properties of writers, musicians, artists, and others. In order for a work to be copyrightable, it must be both tangible, or fixed, and original. There have been many changes made to copyright law throughout time, however, each change has been made in order to further protect a person's intellectual property.

In the eyes of intellectuals, entrepreneurs, and anyone else who wants to be recognized for their own ideas, it is considered appalling to steal the ideas of another and pass them off as your own. However, intellectual property can be hard to claim therefore making plagiarism difficult to confirm. Many Americans assume that Disney outshines their competition due to their staff’s unbelievable ability to come up with exciting new original ideas. However, in recent discussions of Disney’s newest movie, Coco, a controversial issue has been whether Disney has stolen aspects from one of 20th Century Fox’s and the animation studio Reel FX’s works, The Book of Life. On one hand, some argue that when making a movie about the same holiday there are bound to be similarities. From this perspective, it is a mere coincidence that there are many similar aspects within the two movies. On the other hand, however, others argue that there are too many coincidences within the movies for Disney not to have been influenced by 20th Century Fox’s work. In the words of American journalist Drew Grant, one of this view’s main proponents, “Coco’s animation is so strikingly similar to that of The Book of Life that it’s impossible not to imagine Coco’s animators mining the previous film for concept art” (Grant). According to this view, Disney is lying about their source materials and inspiration. In sum, then, the issue is whether Disney stole key aspects from The Book of Life and will not admit it or

The history of U.S copyright law came from England. As a matter of fact, copyright was not intended to reward creators but to prevent sedition. As the number of presses grew in late fifteenth century in England, the authorities started to grant control over the publication of books to a group of printers, called the Stationers’ Company in mid-sixteenth century. The Licensing Act of 1662 confirmed that licensed printers have the right to publish the work forever. The Stationer’s Company didn’t disappear even though the 1662 act lapsed in 1694. Rather, it shifted its focus from printers to authors. Therefore, the Parliament enacted the first copyright law in 1710, called the Statue of Anne, which protects author’s work if they registered their work to the government. Under the Statue of Anne, authors had a right to control their creations and sell their rights to the third person. U.S. Congress has revised the copyright law to broaden the sphere of copyright and to address new technologies as time goes by. This paper illustrates what have the Congress amended in the copyright law and how has the amended law impacted proprietors by looking into major revisions in U.S. copyright law.