The Development Of Technology And The Internet

How has technology and the Internet have brought young people closer together? For today’s teens, friendships can start digitally: 57% of teens have met a new friend online. Social media and online gaming are the most common digital venues for meeting friends. Phone calls are less common early in a friendship, but are still an important way that teens talk with their closest friends.

The element of breach of contract that falls into issue in this case is whether or not there was an actual breach of the contract’s terms. Under Ms. Lee 's claim of breach of contract, her argument revolves around the ambiguity of the text within the contract. In her defense, she claims that sales of "videocassettes" were authorized by the 1952 contract. Her contract stated the sale of "phonographic recordings and/or transcriptions for sale to the public," but lacked the specificity of the term "videocassettes." Ms. Lee’s claim is that she was not paid what was entitled to her; the profits accrued from the sales of “video cassettes.” If video cassettes are to be understood as “transcriptions,” her argument holds a valid case. In contrast, under Disney’s defense to the breach of contract, they base their argument on another factor. Under their customs and usage provision of this contract, Disney interpreted the sales of videocassettes as "any other technology to be invented." Although videocassettes were

The first sale doctrine states that an individual who purchases a legally produced copyrighted work may sell or dispose of the work as that person sees fit

There has recently been some controversy over whether or not reselling digital music is legal or not. A recent ruling, Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc., confirmed that it is illegal; however, this view is patently inaccurate and reselling used digital music with the correct precautions is almost definitely legal (Villasenor). First, background information on ReDigi Inc., a major reseller of used digital music that, four years ago, was shut down because of the ruling, and Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc. (with ReDigi’s great argument examined deeply) must be reviewed before some possible guidelines for future companies wanting to allow consumers to resell their legally bought, used digital music

In seeking to understand the Supreme Court’s judgement in Leegin, two questions immediately come to mind. Firstly, why would the manufacturer seek to establish a minimum retail price for its product? Secondly, what are the consequences for consumer welfare, if the manufacturer succeeds in maintaining a higher retail price?.

So far, the Sixth Circuit has only applied downstream, or post-sale, confusion, to cases involving knockoff products, but the legal rule of downstream confusion should also apply to non-knockoff products. The Lanham Act’s text and the legislator’s intent while modifying the Act suggests that downstream confusion applies to products other than knockoff products. 15 U.S.C. §1127 (2012). Also, the Sixth Circuit has substituted point-of-sale confusion with post-sale confusion before, and should again in our case. Lastly, courts outside of the Sixth Circuit applied downstream confusion to cases that did not involve knockoff products.

In his article, Groskopf first sets the stage by letting the reader take a survey to let them see if they know the type of ownership a reader would have over an example of a digital book. His survey then outlines the uneven distribution of answers given showing that most of his readers are wrong about digital ownership rights. Groskopf continues by stating that most of the rights are outlined in the Terms of Service (TOS) of the selling company, a statistic from a reputable source showing that the majority of buyer’s do not read the TOS and some examples demonstrating how companies can take advantage of this

Among the exclusive rights granted to those “authors” are the rights to distribute, reproduce, in public perform and in public show a piece. These rights give copyright holders management over the utilization of their creations, and a capability to learn, monetarily and otherwise, from the exploitation of their works.

Nature of the Case: Universal City Studios, the plaintiff, alleged that Sony Corporation of America, the defendant, was guilty of copyright infringement. The preceding was a discretionary appeal from the district court to the United States Supreme Court. They sought money damages, profits, and an injunction against the manufacturing and marketing of Betamax VTR’s.

To provide some background information, the creation of American copyright law dates back to the beginnings of the constitution of the United States. That is, the Copyright law was intended to promote science and useful arts by giving the author the right of protection from copy theft (art. I, sec 8). That means that the published work would be protected from being replicated; it cannot be used by anybody else without permission.

Esther Dyson’s views about the problems for providers of intellectual property such as control of pricing of their own products, and how they will operate in an increasingly competitive marketplace where much of the intellectual property is distributed free and suppliers explode in number proved to be more accurate based on the events in the years since he had written the article. The author’s views about the ways to become a leading content provider, by giving the content away, and by making it clear that this "generosity" isn't a moral decision but a business strategy and how controlling copies becomes a complex challenge in a way that it can be either controlled very tightly, limiting distribution to a small, trusted group, or it can rest assured that eventually the product will find its way to a large nonpaying audience and also how the definition of the problem, rather than its solution, will be the scarce resource in the future were explained aptly.

The Statute of Anne was a monumental win for intellectual property laws. “This (The Statute of Anne) provided authors and proprietors of “copies” (or manuscripts) with the right to print and reprint copies of their works (Sherman &Bently, 1999). The authors go on to add the fact that the rights of the author lasted an initial fourteen years with an additional fourteen years if the author is still alive at the end of the initial period, and twenty years for “old books” (Sherman &Bently, 1999). The enactment of The Statute of Anne was unquestionably something that changed how courts and the world viewed intellectual property, and paved the way for what intellectual property laws are today.

when handling laws associated with the internet, privacy and copyright. Additionally, the entertainment industry has seen it’s own ups and downs in this ever evolving digital era. The question to focus on is whether or not the ease of digital copying and distribution online interferes with the revenue available to record labels, productions companies, actors and artists. The focus of this paper will be if, and how, the digital age has affected the entertainment industry. It will look at copyright laws that come into play within the music and film

The idea of intellectual property has many correlations with the concept of the marketplace of idea. According to a common argument, intellectual property rights spark innovation, creating positive economic growth and benefits for all. Because the marketplace comparison is an economic one, there is a tendency to tie intellectual property with the marketplace of ideas. The key argument arises whether ideas- intangible resources, can be protected as property using the same concepts and social processes that protect tangible property. The concept of property stems from scarcity. Which is, the basic economic problem that results from people having unlimited wants but limited resources. Scarcity doesn’t explicitly mean unattainable or

According to the definition, a relevant product market includes “all those products which are regarded as interchangeable or substitutable by the consumer by reason of the products characteristics, their prices and their intended use”. We can presume that the relevant market for film includes all of the five firms: Kodak, Fuji, Konica, Agfa and 3M. However, not all of these firms’ products are viewed as fully interchangeable and substitutable by the consumer as stated in the definition. According to statistics, about 50% of consumers will only buy Kodak film despite of substantial price increases. This phenomenon indicates the consumers’ adamant belief in the superior quality of Kodak film. There were two different viewpoints on the relevant geographic product market for film discussed in the case. According to the district court, the relevant geographic market for film is worldwide, since foreign manufactures sell considerable amounts of film in the United States and Kodak’s market share is only 36% globally. However, the government argues that this determination is wrong and that the relevant geographic market in this case should be limited to the United States. The main explanation here is that a relevant geographic market comprises an area where the firm can exercise the market power. Taking into consideration the fact that Kodak charges much higher prices in the US comparing to other countries, the relevant geographic market