How Technology Has Changed Copyright

Information age is the world we live in today it is how we navigate to do everything phones, laptops, tablets, and the biggest one the internet. We have the ability to control and see the world with all this technology, it leads us to new heights and creations as technology and knowledge advances by the year. The best part is matching ideas and being able to build off of these new creations to make more advanced and proficient media. But as copyrighting laws come into play we are limited from achieving these things as corporate companies that oversee our music, movies, media, etc. shorten the pathways to build off ideas that are already out there in society. Brett Gaylor the director in the documentary: RIP a Remix Manifesto uses logos and ethos to explain the copyright infringement world to show how we are limited in building off creations and discouraged by copyrighting laws in this mash up film.

Copyright problems arose with the advent of the free availability of information on the Internet. It was easy for people to steal music, movies and images from the internet and use them to create their own mash-up piece. Prior to the internet copyrighting actually encouraged creativity. Once music sharing websites like Napster began, musicians and other artists began suing and copyright laws became more rigouous in their scope and enforcement.

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

Today's digital technology and the computer have changed how the average consumer can acquire information and entertainment. No longer do we have to wait for the CD to hear a new song, or the release date to watch a movie. The technology is available on our home computers. But is this an infringement on copyright? What about the rights of artists, authors, producers, or actors? Has our technology progressed so far that it infringes on these peoples' livings? It is only a matter of time before laws are passed regarding Internet use. Are we ready to give up the freedom we have had up to this point? In her essay "The Digital Rights War", Pamela Samuelson states that " The new future of technically protected

“A copyright provides protection for original works of authorship, fixed in a tangible medium of expression including literary, musical, and dramatic works, as well as photographs, audio and visual recordings, software, and other intellectual works.” (Hinson, 2014) Copyrights are often the most difficult intellectual property to protect. The internet has become such an important tool for business and commerce. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to enforce laws that are broken via the internet. Many times piracy is the biggest issue of copyright infringement that involves intellectual property.

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

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 Copyright Act of 1909, which would eventually be outdated by the Copyright Act of 1976 protected all published works between 1909 and 1978. Unpublished works were protected under common law which meant that the rights would be determined by previous court cases. Under copyright law, a work is published if copies or phonorecords are distributed to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership or by rental, lease or lending. This was primarily based on the printing press and its distribution of works which at the time was unfair to the original author. Due to groundbreaking developments in technology in the next 60 years such as radio, television, communication satellites, cable television, computers, photocopying machines, videotape recorders etc., there was a dire need to reform the law to secure works now, and in the

The US copyright law basically developed from statutory and English Common Law. Hence, types of work and copyright protection are slightly similar to the UK copyright law. The copyright law of the United States also provides copyright protection in “literary work”, “dramatic work” and “musical work”. In section 102 (a)(2) stated that protection of the US copyright law cover “musical work, including any accompanying words,” as same as section 102(a)(7) which protect the copyright of sound recording.

According to Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, theft is, "The act of stealing; specifically, the felonious taking and removing of personal property, with an intent to deprive the rightful owner of the same" (Webster's 2). Before the advent of moveable type, no one had cause to apply this concept to information rather than physical property. If one were to steal a book, the act was easily recognized as of the same moral color as stealing a horse, a nugget of gold, or any other physical object. The thief?s possession of the stolen item constituted the rightful owner?s lack of it, a loss both real and measurable. Today, theft seems a hazier concept,

Since the beginning, copyrights have existed to protect people from theft of content, thus inspiring more creativity from the public. The interpretation of these laws has been twisted by large corporations to serve as a legal means to restrict content for public use and to gain from profitable licensing. It is essential that copyrighted materials are available to everyone for our culture to grow. With the copyright laws so perplexing and different depending on the context, individuals may not understand they are committing a crime by using information and be subjected to lawsuits, despite good intentions. Lawrence Lessig’s three proposals for copyright changes are key concepts facing issues like this. It is crucial we pay attention because our cultural future is in jeopardy.

has led to a paradigm shift in the approach to copyright infringement. Where unauthorized copying of a

1. Introduction The history of copyright is one of entanglement. Prior to the first official copyright statute a printing guild known as the Stationers ' Company maintained monopoly power over printing and regulating books. Their monopoly power, granted by the Licensing of the Press Act 1662, was revoked in 1694 after the English Parliament refused to renew it in light

The purpose of the copyright system has always been to promote creativity in society and protect the creator’s interests. In applying copyright laws to any creation, three basic guidelines apply. First is the fair return for a creator’s labor, second is “Fair Use” of the creator’s labor and finally the Progress of Science and useful Arts to further the public good. The application of these three guidelines in litigation for A&M Records, Inc. vs. Napster, found that the rights of reproduction, and distribution had been violated, in effect upholding the copyrights’ of nineteen different music companies represented under A&M Records name, this ruling had protected the music industries interests. However it would seem that the publishing industry would not be so lucky, litigation in Authors’ Guild vs. Google ruled that Google’s actions constituted fair use. Under these two scenarios’ the copyright laws’ have, effectively, protected the rights of music artists’, protected the public’s right to “fair use” and sparked new opportunities for creative growth. However, lawmakers continue to struggle to define copyright boundaries between the public’s right of use and the creator’s right to profit from their efforts.

In 1774 free culture was made because copyright was stopped in the case called Donaldson versus Becket in the House of the Lords in England. In 1710 the copyright was limited to 14 years. Donaldson was allowed to reprint Shakespeare despite other publishers were trying to stop him and demanded a common copyright law that would be forever.