Essay about The Digital Millennium Copyright Act

Lawyers for the recording industry argued that illegal downloading hurt the recording industry and that Joel Tenenbaum was a hardcore copy right infringer. Joel Tenenbaum argued in his defense also argued that the U.S. Copyright Act is unconstitutional and that Congress did not intend the law to impose liability or damages when the copyright infringements amount to "consumer copying." We're pleased with this decision," RIAA spokeswoman Cara Duckworth said after the Supreme Court's announcement Monday (2012). This is not the first such case of this nature either.

One of the most common, yet controversial, issues of First Amendment law is the subject of copyright and infringement. Although the subject may not seem major at first, many different issues and controversies have risen and become more common than ever over the years. The issues that have become pertinent to this subject are endless, including trademark infringement, piracy, theft, fraud, plagiarism, and many more. With the coming of age and advancement of technology, these cases have become more common and appear more often than ever before. Government officials have always been strict about copyright rulings, and have tried to deliver fair and just rulings for both parties involved under First Amendment rules. Because the owner’s work and material is protected under the First Amendment, it gets tricky when involving another party that can claim the same work of art. In short, the definition of copyright has always been cut and dry: allowing owners of creative works the right to control and profit from their creations. It is basically recognized as a form of property ownership.

I’m afraid that the issues that had to do with the rights for creators of content (authors of music, books, papers, etc.) to be able to profit from their work without being deprived of their livelihoods due to piracy, was confounded due to the ignorance of law makers about the nature of the Internet (the free flow of ideas, the ability to collaborate with people from all over the world and engage in thoughtful discourse and debate, etc.). Further, the influence of money and pressure being brought upon the government to pass the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA) by very wealthy and influential organizations (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organizations_with_official_stances_on_the_SOPA_and_PIPA ) created undue pressure to get Congress to act without thoughtful investigation into the

Australian copyright law as it stands does not anticipate or take into account existing and new technologies in society. The internet has profoundly changed the way individuals’ access, share and create content. It enables widespread and extensive access to knowledge instantaneously, fosters

Copyright is the legal right, to an inventor to perform, print, publish, film, or record artistic, literary, or musical material, and to allow others to do the same. Copyright law was developed to provide the creators and inventors of any works with powerful and effective rights of exclusivity over their creations (Patterson & Lindberg, 1991). Over the past, these rights were almost unlimited. People would use existing developments as if they were their own without any regard of the creator’s exclusive rights. The need to balance and limit such rights arose, and governments established these limits for the general good of the public.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that peer to peer file sharing is copyright infringement. Millions of people illegally copied and shared copyrighted music, films, and software over the internet that directly infringed MGM’s copyright. Copyright violations were knowingly caused by the defendant by promoting the

One of the ethical implications to consider when engaging in actions that violate the DMCA is that the industry could be losing money due to some of their products being distributed for free on the world wide web, also they could be spending a lot of money in setting up online piracy-detecting software to prevent these illegal activities from happening. Every person who illegally downloads copies of online content is costing these industries monetary losses. These contents are not just “free for all,” DMCA violations hurt people who are involved in the making of these contents such as the entertainment, media, journalism and publishing industries.

A lot has happened in the world of information since 1976. The digital age has had a big impact on our interpretation of fair use. It used to be that illegal copies of digital material were easy to spot because they were of obvious poor quality compared to the original. Advances in technology, however, have made it possible to easily create copies that are just as high quality as the original. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 put up a few barriers to fair use. This legislation made it illegal to destroy or bypass any copyright protection mechanism on a digital work even on a legally purchased copy. For educators, this means that even if the use is fair, copying these files or videos is restricted.

Giving out the identity of a person accused of a crime, whether they are guilty or not is a breach of the Harmful communications act. By posting the identity of the person you are liable what happens to them as they are now at risk, and you are breaching the privacy laws because you gave out personal information. The name, photograph, phone number, car registration details and home address of a man accused of theft were posted on a Facebook group with tens of thousands of members recently. This was a serious breach of the harmful communications act. If any of the members of that group decide to take matters into their own hands to stop the theft, that has not been proven guilty, the person who posted all of their personal information would

presented a case that involved peer-to-peer file-sharing networks and violating the safe harbor provisions of copyright thief violating the (DMCA) “Digital Age of the Millennium Act.” This charges were brought red flags to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against YouTube, Inc. and filed by Viacom Int’l Inc., on a remand from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. However, in light of the tedious claims of Viacom, the courts, did give the notices to YouTube to remove the material that violate the DMCA, all monetary relief and

In our present day in age, technology and the internet has made it very easy to find and obtain music, movies, television shows, and other media forms without having to pay a fee. In recent years, the music and movie industry, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) initiated a campaign to combat the illegal sharing and downloading of files, songs, and movies. These illegal files are usually transferred through users and peer-to-peer networks including LimeWire, FrostWire, Bearshare, Kazaa, and most importantly Napster, which initiated it all. The illegal files are not only limited to music and movies but also various types of pirated software, such as Microsoft Office or Adobe Photoshop, that are accompanied with serial numbers and instructional manuals. The RIAA and MPAA argued that if an individual exerts much time, effort, and money into a piece of art or software that they created, they should be thoroughly compensated. Therefore, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act was created and instituted by the United States Congress to restrict internet piracy by banning the fabrication, allocation, and illegal distribution of pirated materials. In addition, the DMCA was used to accommodate the constant changes of the growing digital age into current copyright laws that are usually reserved for books, magazines, or articles. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act is just and protects the rights of the artists and

Right before a movie starts in your theatre, you’re subjected to many advertisements. One that always stood out was the piracy campaign ad which gave a perspective on the downloading of movies from an off set worker. His distinctive message was that, movie stars are paid exorbitant amounts of money but the on and off set workers are not. By downloading the movie or “screener” in advanced, you’re really hurting the people behind the magic. So what does this have to do with us? Under the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act it states that copyright holders can send cease-and-desist letters to Internet providers when subscribers are discovered sharing unauthorized material. Has our privacy been

The term ‘fair use’ is defined by Hudson as the use of copyright material without permission from the owner for purposes that are deemed fair. In the digital economy however, new challengers arise with ‘fair use’. These challenges are due to the complex and changing nature of the digital environment, and the need for the law to remain relevant, and be clear and broadly understood in the community. Secondly, the purpose of copyright law is to stimulate creation and learning by providing incentives to create and distribute. Therefore, it is important that reforms do not change the fundamental objectives of the copyright law. The ALRC has made recommendations outlining implementation of ‘fair use’ legislation in Australia, which is intended to outline the purpose and character of copyright material that may be used without permission from the owner. The purpose of the ALRC report is build a fair and reasonable legal guidelines where copyright material can be used fairly for purposes that may not infringe copyright.

How can traditional (or old media) enterprises such as film, television and music overcome the threat of online piracy and file sharing?

Copyright infringement is the unauthorized use of copyrighted material in a manner that violates one of the copyright owner's exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduce or perform the copyrighted work, or to make derivative works that build upon it.