User talk:Skillet19

US Copyright Law                                    By: Josh Miller Intellectual property as we know it is always changing. In order to protect the creators of intellectual works, such as literary pieces, musical arrangements, and inventions, our country has set up a balance of rules and regulations. These statutes help to keep order and uniformity in dealing with problems that might arise regarding intellectual property. This system is composed of various elements that maintain a standard of intellectual justice. One of the components of this system is the copyright. In order to obtain a copyright, one must first obtain a copyright registration form. The copyright registration forms are different for each type of works but the process is generally the same. First, one must compile the work that they wish to copyright. Second, they must obtain a form pertaining to the type of work they have created. Then, they must send the form, a fee, and a copy of the work and all related material to the United States Copyright Office (USCO). The USCO will then review the work and determine whether or not a copyright can be granted. They will then notify the person or organization regarding the status of their work. If the request is granted a copyright is issued. The first United States Copyright Act went into effect in 1790. “It granted American authors the right to print, re-print, or publish their work for a period of fourteen years and to renew for another fourteen.” (1) This law was was intended to encourage writers and inventors to construct original works by giving them the sole ownership to their achievements. It was also designed to allow public domain to promote science and art thru public access. The Copyright Act of 1790 was adequate when it was first enacted, but as time went on it needed several revisions to maintain its adequacy to the modern society. It was first revised in 1831. Changes were made to the term of protection of copyrighted works to twenty-eight years and a renewal of fourteen years. In 1870, the copyright registrations were relocated to the Library of Congress Copyright Office. In 1886, through the Berne Convention, an treaty was established to allow authors international copyright protection in participating countries. In 1909, the renewal term was increased to twenty-eight years. In the 1976 Act, to adjust to recent technological developments, the term of copyright was extended to the author’s life plus fifty years while works for hire were covered for seventy-five years. Up until the last decade, copyright law was limited to protecting traditional mediums of copyrighted material such as books, cassette tapes, paintings, etc. With the invention of the personal computer, and later on the internet, a whole new medium for transporting intellectual property was created. This posed a potential problem for authors with the possibility of unauthorized reproduction and distribution of copyrighted material by those who did not own the rights to that property. It wasn’t until 1998 that intellectual property was protected on this new medium know as the PC (personal computer) and the internet. It was then that President Bill Clinton singed into law the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The DMCA “was the foundation of an effort by Congress to implement United States treaty obligations and to move the nation's copyright law into the digital age.” (2) It helped to curb piracy of copyrighted material by placing limits on how digital intellectual property could be handled. At the same time, though, the DMCA also tried to keep the information flowing freely as to allow the public domain to stay alive. While the DMCA was considered to be a major breakthrough to recording artists in 1998, like everything else in this modern age it became obsolete. New problems arose that could not be handled with the DMCA. These problems stem from both sides of the table. Some leaders in the music industry have been doing everything they can to stop online sharing of copyrighted music. In doing so, they are infringing on the rights of the purchaser of the music to make personal copies of music that they own for themselves by recording their music onto copy-protected CDs. “The anti-circumvention provisions [of the DMCA] have been used to stifle a wide array of legitimate activities, rather than to stop copyright piracy.” (3) On the other hand, recording artists such as Metallica say that their music is being pirated despite efforts of the DMCA. They claim, “The trading of such information -- whether it's music, videos, photos, or whatever - is, in effect, trafficking in stolen goods.” (4) Digital media is distributed a number of different ways via the internet. One of the most popular ways is by using a peer-to-peer (P2P) sharing client. Probably the most famous digital media sharing system is a P2P client known as Napster. Napster deals mostly with music files (mp3’s) but it also allows the sharing of other types of media. The way it works is a person would go to Napster’s website (www.napster.com) and download a free copy of the client and become a member. Membership is also free. Then that person would type the name of an mp3 that they want to download. The client sends the information to Napster’s servers. The servers then find matches for that mp3 listed on other member’s computers who were running the client. The servers would then send the information back to that person’s client and would give them a list that they could choose who’s computer they wanted to download the mp3 from. Napster rapidly became an essential tool to audiophiles all across the world. This was the first time in history that the public could have access to so much copyrighted intellectual property with the ability to instantly use it. This appeared to be a humongous leap for the advancement of public domain, however, a good percentage of the music industry was up in arms. Since Napster allowed people to freely trade copyrighted music, some musicians and record labels claimed that they were being cheated out of royalties rightfully owed them. Some of them even took the company to court. “Hard rock band Metallica and rapper Dr. Dre have sued MP3-swapping company Napster, charging that it contributes to widespread piracy of their work online.” (5) Not all musicians are against Napster though. “Rapper Chuck D, a longtime supporter of independent artists' MP3 distribution, has weighed in as Napster's most vociferous backer in the music community.” (5) P2P clients such as Napster have become a powerful solution for independent artists who are not backed by the major labels. It helps them to gain an audience where their music might not have been heard via traditional means. P2P clients are not the only way that digital media is being potentially shared illegally. Personal Compact Disc (CD) duplication is becoming more popular than ever before. Most of the reason behind this is because of the fact that CD copying machines (CD burners) are cheaper, faster, and more efficient than a few years ago. A lot of people use CD burners in conjunction with P2P clients to make hard copies of music that they do not legally own. Most people that do copy CD’s do not sell them. They usually make copies for themselves. This is where the main debate regarding copyright protection of music comes into play. According to current copyright laws, “...[people] have the right to make backup copies of their content.” (6) Most people legitimately burn mixed CD’s of music that they already legally own in order to listen to their favorite songs from different artists. This way they have a CD with a bunch of songs that they want to listen to without having to skip over ones that they don’t like. This is a legal right that is given to the person when he or she purchases music. But the music industry is trying to take away this right by “...deploying “copy-protected CDs” that promise to curtail consumers’ ability to make legitimate, personal copies of music they have purchased.” (3) It is understandable that musicians and record labels are trying to protect themselves by inventing new types of encryption technology that stifle attempted acts of piracy of their copyrighted works, but it is not okay when they begin to infringe on the rights of others. Just because music is a multibillion dollar industry does not mean that these corporate giants should be allowed to freely step all over the general public in their attempt to control their profits. This cannot be tolerated. Some people are taking action against these “encrypted CD’s”. They do this by writing computer programs that break down the security codes that protect the CD’s from being copied. This action is know as circumvention. It is done in mostly by writing programs but it can be done other ways also. One way is to simply import the music in a different file format on one’s computer (such as .aiff) and then just translate it into a format that can be read by most CD burning software (such as .mp3). Probably the most simple non-technological solution can be done on CD’s produced by Sony Entertainment. Sony leaves a blank space on the outer rim of the CD that confuses computer CD-ROM (Compact Disc - Read Only Memory) drives into thinking that the CD is blank and therefore the drive labels the CD as unreadable. The way to get around this is to take a black marker and just draw a line around the outer rim of the CD. The music industry became sly to the fact that people were and would be decrypting their security techniques. They made sure that when the DMCA was drafted that it would contain a section regarding anti-circumvention. “Section 1201 contains two distinct prohibitions: a ban on acts of circumvention, as well as a ban on the distribution of tools and technologies used for circumvention.” (3) This pretty much allowed the industry to use whatever techniques they wanted to use to digitally protect their art. Anti-circumvention law do not only apply to music, they also apply to every type of digital media. The entertainment industry has been using section 1201 of the DMCA heavily. Sometimes they even abuse it by using it for what it was not intended. For example, when you purchase a Digital Video Disc (DVD) you usually have the ability to skip the movie previews that show before the feature presentation if you so desire. So, if you were to purchase a “...Disney DVD [that] prevents you from fast-forwarding through the commercials that preface the feature presentation, efforts to circumvent this restriction would be unlawful...” according to section 1201. (3) 	Another type of digital media is becoming very popular as more and more people are switching from “dial-up” to broadband internet connections. This type of digital media is known as streaming media. Streaming media is different from regular digital media (such as mp3’s and movies) in that it is not downloaded as a file. Media that is streamed is like listening to the radio without a tape player and watching television without a VCR. It is only viewable or audible instantaneously. This means that the media being transmitted cannot b copied. Most of the entertainment industry favors streaming media versus mp3’s. Streaming media usually requires a high-bandwidth connection to the internet in order to access it which is why it is now becoming a wider used media transport method as broadband connections to the internet are more prevalent each day. Streaming media is not completely “copyright safe” however. Some computer programmers have designed programs known as “stream rippers”. These “rippers” take the streamed media and transform it into other media file formats such as .mp3. These files are then able to be imported into CD burning software and copied onto a CD. Some people believe that stream rippers should be legal because it is the equivalent of taping a song off of the radio. Some in the music industry say that it should be illegal because it is just another form of copyright piracy. While the music industry is having such a tough time with piracy, the movie industry is also getting hit pretty hard too. With the invention of the internet and the DVD, countless ways of pirating copyrighted movies have been created. One can now search the internet for just about any movie and be able to download it with the click of a mouse. Programmers are even building faster ways of doing this with compression software such as DivX. With Divx, “You can download a full-length, full-motion, full-screen, DVD-quality feature film using a standard broadband connection in about the time it takes to have a pizza delivered.” (7) DivX was originally intended to allow people to rent movies online. One would be able to go to an online movie store, rent a movie with a credit card, download it, and watch it for a limited amount of rented time (usually five days). This system was great when it was used for what it was made for. Once hackers got a hold of DivX software, though, things changed. The came out with new versions of the software that allowed regular DVD’s to be encoded into DivX format. They then came out with new DivX players that would allow people to download and watch the movies completely free. Manufacturers of DVD’s have tried to combat this with copyright protection devices encoded into the discs. It seems that every time a new copyright technology is created, it is broken by hackers. This falls under the anti-circumvention laws but the area surrounding public domain and copyright infringement is so clouded that usually nothing gets done about it. Also, there are so many people out there that are decoding copyright technology that it is impossible to catch every one. The new age of the internet has also opened up a whole new world of opportunities for authors of copyrighted literary works. Authors are now able to transform to transform books and articles into electronic form (e-book). They can then sell their e-books on sites such as www.ebook.com. A person who wants a particular e-book can look on one of these sites, purchase the e-book, and download it for viewing. They can either view them on their desktop or laptop computer or transfer them onto their personal digital assistant (PDA). A PDA is a lightweight, hand-held, usually pen-based computer used as a personal organizer. Transferring an e-book onto a PDA is very convenient because they can be taken and viewed just about anywhere. This is practical for someone who likes to read who travels a lot. PDA’s can store more than one book at a time making it possible to have your entire personal digital library with you wherever you go. Unfortunately, e-books are prone to piracy too. Hackers have now found a way to crack encryption devices on Adobe’s e-book software. This makes it possible to download free copies of e-books with out the author’s consent. "The publishing industry stands to lose $1.5 billion through e-book piracy by 2005..." (8) 	This is not the end of the digital world for authors though. Companies “...such as Gemstar-TV Guide International and digital-rights management (DRM) firms such as ContentGuard...” have developed new technology to combat this type of piracy. (8) They are introducing security and copyright protection devices to publisher across the globe. These devices guarantee authors that they can protect their works from online piracy. So far, the long term effectiveness of these devices is inconclusive. To bring everything into perspective, copyright law is ever changing to adapt with the times. New bills and amendments are being introduced all the time by both sides of the table. Whether it be musicians, publishers, producers, free music activists or whoever, they all what their voice to be heard on these issues. They want to have an influence on what is done and what changes are made to copyright law. Copyright law was made to protect the creators of intellectual property from being taken advantage of. Some say that today it has crossed its boundaries while others persist that it is not doing enough. In any case, there is a long road ahead on this issue. All sides have valid points and it will take decades of legislature and debate till it all gets straightened out. No one person can figure this out alone. Constant molding of the law is how copyright protection has advanced as far as it has. In order to ensure a sturdy future of copyrights, we just have to make sure that they can still protect their owners while allowing science and the arts to progress through public domain.

Works Cited

1. Masciola, Amy. “Timeline: A History of Copyright in the United States.”. November 22, 2002.

2. Executive Summary. Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Section 104 Report. . March 2003.

3. EFF Whitepaper: Unintended Consequences. Three Years Under the DMCA. . May 2002.

4. Jones, Christopher. “Metallica Rips Napster.” . April 13, 2000.

5. Borland, John. “Musicians launch national anti-Napster campaign.” . July 11, 2000.

6. The Consumer Technology Bill of Rights . May 2003.

7. What is DivX? May 2003.

8. Jacobs, Farrin and Allbritton, Chris. “E-book publishers face piracy panic.” . January 1, 2001.