I already talked about the Shepard Fairey case, the Irina controversy, Dr. Seuss v. Dr. Juice lawsuit, the “Prince” incidence and Youtube issues in my blog posts, but what do these cases mean to us and what impact do they have? With the invention of new technologies, such as Youtube, Facebook and p2p filing sharing software, one’s work becomes very to be disseminated widely within a short period of time; furthermore, the copies are impossible to be eradicated as they will linger for an extended period of time. With the development of technology, copyright issues are not only limited to texts, but also spread to every arena, such as music and fashion industry. Authors and artists can feel the danger and threat of the world nowadays, so they intuitively tighten control over their intellectual property. It is unfair for someone to steal their work on which they put so much effort.
Yet while they exert greater control over their intellectual property, they also built a barrier around themselves and subconsciously impede the intellectual exchange with the rest of the world. Because of the threat they feel, they are likely to become too paranoid about others’ attempts to borrow their concepts to discern the purposes of others’ usage. Some of them are for creative purposes and for the greater good of the society. People’s opinions are made from reading others’ work, so without borrowing others’ work, critical thinking will be greatly deterred; people also get inspiration from others’ ideas and create their own, so without borrowing others’ ideas, creativity and intellectual stimulation will diminish. The government recognizes the need to protect the intellectuals’ rights so that they will not be discouraged from publicly expressing their ideas and also acknowledges the importance of the vitality of intellectual and cultural exchange, hence the copyright law with four “fair use” clauses.
Yet as a lot of copyright infringing cases are fairly complicated, sometimes the four fair use guideline contradict each other. The court needs to judge case by case and weigh each guideline against each other, and as a result the judgement on how much weight to put on each one becomes subjective. Therefore, generally speaking, California’s district court is relatively lenient toward internet companies compared to New York’s, as the prosperity of the IT industry (symbolized by the Silicon Valley) might bend their preference; same rules apply to New York, as it is likely to favor the big, traditional companies. Viacom is playing smart as it sues Youtube in New York, as Youtube might have been won the case a long time ago if the case were processed in California. Therefore, the term “fairness” can get ambiguous sometimes.
Until the government comes up with better solutions, we need to be extra careful about including others’s work in their own (much like the way we freshman cite scholarly sources for Expos). One common misunderstanding is that even if you acknowledge the original author or artist by putting that person’s name down, or put a disclaimer notice, you can still be found liable for copyright infringement. Acknowledging the copyright owner may shield you from accusation of plagiarism, but not from copyright infringement. A disclaimer notice will come into use only when the court is having difficulty deciding fair use or not: its presence may help tilt the court’s decision toward the favorable side; it’s useless, however, if the court has strong arguments weighing against you. As “being careful” on the users’ side seems to be the best solution for now, I really worry about the chilling effect brought by the intense copyright battles. Maybe there are fewer interesting parodies, fewer creative designer dresses and fewer hilarious Youtube videos. I know that my life will not be that colorful if this is the case.
13 responses so far ↓
轮盘赌法 // Dec 29th 2009 at 11:30 am
Great idea, thanks for this tip!
Issac Maez // Dec 29th 2009 at 11:41 am
Good Post🙂
Burton Haynes // Dec 29th 2009 at 11:51 am
Good Post🙂
Hipolito M. Wiseman // Dec 29th 2009 at 12:01 pm
Good Post🙂
ImBored // Dec 29th 2009 at 6:29 pm
This is one really dry blog! And many of the conclusions seems pretty narrow based on a line of reasoning that doesn’t always apply. 🙂 just makes everything awfully difficult to understand.
Jacko // Jan 1st 2010 at 11:19 am
Wishing you a very happy and prosperous new year !
celtic tattoos // Jan 3rd 2010 at 3:37 am
Nice blog and some interesting information, I found it really by mistake looking for something else. Have bookmarked it and will be back soon.
John // Jan 3rd 2010 at 5:55 am
Nice site – Wishing you a very happy and prosperous new year !
игры в рулетку // Jan 3rd 2010 at 8:41 am
Hey, ok, I get it, I guess – but does this really work?
ruleta // Jan 3rd 2010 at 10:15 am
I cannot believe this will work!
βγάλτε χρήματα με την ρουλέτα // Jan 3rd 2010 at 11:18 am
Damn, that sound’s so easy if you think about it.
Cecille Theberge // Jan 4th 2010 at 2:59 pm
Hi there, been coming to your website frequently and enjoy it very much. Though, if I am truthful, I am a little green with envy of your rankings in Google 😉 you are ahead of me all the time :). I have a comparatively new website, and hope you don’t mind me asking, but would you use the method they implement here? http://webmasters-tools.info/i/link-building.php I have been, and been getting pretty good traffic so far, but just wondering what else I should be doing in terms of promotion. I know it’s bold to ask, but can you advocate anything? Thanks very much.
βγάλτε χρήματα με την ρουλέτα // Feb 3rd 2010 at 4:57 pm
This brings me to an idea:…