TeknologikL

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/07/jammie-thomas-challenges-monstrous-192m-p2p-verdict.ars

As an English teacher, having no copyright laws seem to be the antithesis to what I teach and makes my heart stop when thinking about what this would do to plagiarism, which is so rampant in its incidence with near universal access to the web already.

That being said, fair-use seems like a good idea, but not exactly cut and dry as to its boundaries. I just did a quick read on and overview of Sections 107-118 of U.S. Copyright law and it seems like a very slippery slope.

I have a buddy who just published a book. The money from that book is helping him keep his family afloat in these tough economic times. It isn't every case where corporate greed is fueling copyright and patent law.

Would I love free access to everything? Of course. Would I love to have a million dollars appear in my bank account? Same deal.

I just think there needs to be a clearer definition of fair-use or perhaps a scenario where creators of copyrighted work can agree to either opt in or not to a fair-use clause when they submit their work for the world to see/use.

It works, to a degree, for a music with GarageBand.com....

"Antithesis" is not an English word, it is Greek, and so is "plagiarism". Should Greece charge royalties to every non-greek that uses these word?

Say a medic develops a cure for a disease that can save thousands. Is it fair to claim rights for providing the cure and charge thousands to every individual for treatment?

I am a collector of music. When I appreciate someones work I buy the original CD or record. My collection is now worth close to 5000 euros and even much more to me and others with similar taste.

The church has incredible revenues selling gods or religion. They also have a fast and very effective systems for protecting against others who will sell for their benefit only.

Scientific patends are there to protect intellectual property of scientists. Yet it is often found in industry that a small company cannot afford good quality documentation by lawyers while a large company will make a far more secure claim. Even when the claims of someone less wealthy go all the way to court, it is a hard time to protect his property against a wealthy "plagiarist". So it ends up being a way of protection for large establishments and not at all for the poor individual with a really good idea.

That is why people support this kind of piracy!

<it is a hard time to protect his property against a wealthy "plagiarist". So it ends up being a way of protection for large establishments and not at all for the poor individual with a really good idea.>

The patent is the ONLY protection that a small businessman has against the wealthy "plagiarist." The patent was invented to keep large corporations from gobbling up individuals ideas and instantly putting the individual out of business.

If someone has a neat toy that he is making at home and selling at a market without a patent, then it is perfectly legal for a large business to buy one of the toys, reverse engineer it, then mass produce it and sell it for 1/10 the price that the businessman is charging. End result: anyone who goes to the market says that the business man is overcharging for the toy, and he goes out of business within a month. If the guy had a patent, then he would be entitled to a penny or two for every toy sold by the large business.

<Say a medic develops a cure for a disease that can save thousands. Is it fair to claim rights for providing the cure and charge thousands to every individual for treatment?>

Are you saying then that if a medic invents a cure then it should be the role of the government to take the cure from the medic and distribute it with tax dollars while giving the medic nothing more in return than a thank you. What then would inspire the medic to further his work and try for the next great accomplishment? I think that Communism has already ran its course, and the end result was quite predictable.

Kaplin

Very interesting development. Imitation is the very way of how we lead our lives. Most of the human activities are based on imitation from fellow beings. All our desires, materialistic pursuits, competitions, profession are all based on what others are doing.

This is obvious by the fact that we get inspired from nature, animals and other beings. The flying birds -the inspiration for aircrafts, the floating log-for ships, the rolling stones- the inspiration for wheels and so on. Human species being the most intelligent beings ,exercise good grasping power and imitation skills. That means nature is the demonstrator and claims no copy rights or patents.

Technology development phase is a fast changing one exploring new options, facilities and services. Only the established ones thrive long term survival. It is rather an interesting fast game of refreshing intellects.

Well, coming to the piracy part, nominal rights of use charges, areas of allotment and distribution networks can reduce tendency to piracy. If the cost of originals become cheaper and affordable, I don't think someone else can duplicate further cheaply. Ultimately the game is for survival and making livelihood. The consumer got the smartness to choose the original/ imitate based on his need and ethics. The undue over cost imposition of patented products, a negative trend leading to such formation of pirate parties.

The struggle will goon it seems, the creative ones become more sophisticated and the pirates chasing with imitation-an endless struggle for survival, and all in the game.

"Do you agree with the fair-use copyright views of the Pirate Party..." No

"...or think they are just a bunch of thieves?" Can't say but are they?

I, so much, believe in the saying that "the labourer deserves his/her wage"

I'm also of the openion that, the copyright owner should reserve the right to spell out how and where the material can be used during the tenancy of the copyright and cannot by same law, with hold this spell-out.

That is my idea of fair-use.

Again, it is better for the the big coporations to abuse by holding tight to copyrights than for the pyrates to abuse by feeding fat from other peoples efforts while denying them their due reward for hardwork.

"The Pirate Party also has very strict beliefs on the guaranteed privacy of all citizens both online and in the streets." I share this belief and will support them to that extent.

Cheers,

ethobil

As with any law, I think copyright and patent laws should be reformed to do what they were originally intended to do. For copyrights and patents, that is to let the creator produce his product without everyone copy it, at least for a time. When it comes to music and stuff on the web, I don't know what you do. I would say if you don't want it stolen, don't leave it in the public where everyone has access.

I don't leave my valuables on the sidewalk, I lock my house when I am gone. Why not take precautions instead of complaining all of the time...Oh well, it's always someone else's fault...

Someone should ask the Grateful Dead whether or not they cared about piracy. Hay, the more people hearing there message...thats a novel idea...the better. They made there money performing at concerts...another novel idea.

How many people knocked off the hole dead skull thing. I can remember that picture on everything from cars to road signs and I never heard the Dead complain about copyright infringement.

Maybe they weren't so dead after all.

Now the Swedish courts should turn their attention to that other hive of plagiarism- public libraries! Sure, they may not reproduce copyrighted material themselves, but anyone can borrow material and copy it at will. They are guilty of enabling piracy.

What constitutes piracy certainly has not kept abreast with today's technology. For copying data is precisely what any computer does many, many times to produce the images we see and hear. Does anybody know if Cisco and other router manufacturers brought into the Pirate Bay suit for also enabling piracy?

My personal touchstone if copying was piracy or fair use, use to be much simpler in the days of cassette tapes. If the music I wished to copy for a friend was not available for sale somewhere then it was fair use copying for a friend since no sale was being deprived. Today the copyright ogres seem to want to control any and all media if ever a royalty could be claimed.

One thing that has always bothered me about today's copyright laws, I do not like that authors, artists and in general any creator of copy-written material has to ever pay or refer back to the owner of the copyright to repeat their own material.

Hi Kaplin - Enjoyed your article.

The Swedish Pirate Party reminds of the U.S. Libertarian Party, except with a software and Internet-freedom focus. I can definitely see this idea from Sweden getting bigger traction here in the U.S. over the coming years.

Also snubbing his nose a bit at restrictive rules is Harry Shearer's tongue-in-cheek take of U.S. copyright law, each week in his KCRW Le Show program. I enjoy Harry's radio program very much, since I agree with his unstated idea, underneath the humor, that the laws are overdone, skewed toward the big corporations, and stifle innovation and free expression by small entrepreneurs and creative people.

This especially applies to younger Americans in their 20's, 30's, and maybe their 40's. The folks being hurt try and write software and generate content for the Internet, design/engineer new products, and need to be supported, especially in the crazy economy we have now.

Entrepreneurs have families too, and the majority aren't Microsoft millionaires, fortunate enough to have retired already and able to pull in monthly residual checks, protected by copyright law, for work done long ago. Law firms that continue to take in monthly checks from the Federal Tobacco settlement of the 90's bother me in a similar way.

There's got to be more reasonableness to the law, and maybe by having more engineers, computer programmers and Internet creators representing us in Albany and Washington - inspired by some of the Pirate Party ideas - that could happen. Right now, there are only 2-3 engineers I'm aware of working in Congress - the vast majority of folks in Washington have backgrounds in law and not technology.

However, as someone who tries to respect the law - and see it changed when it's unfair, I also try and catch Glenn Busby's Copyright Forum on Albany's WAMC radio station, to make sure I'm in compliance with the law myself, as I do my work on the Internet.

Thanks for blogging on this topic.

- Larry

But it seems history must be remembered if we are to critique an institution which has taken advantage of many it was formed to protect in the past.

As in the case of Antonio Meucci extensively documented inventor of the 'talking telegraph' 1849 a.k.a. telephone...

stolen by guess who...

defended by the best legal system money can buy...

and it happens, and happens...