As such, the concept of fair use has become more troublesome for copyright holders, since it is now possible to make a flawless digital copy of an original work that is indistinguishable from the original work.
As has been frequently reported in connection with peer-to-peer file sharing, the major copyright owners have taken an aggressive approach to the expansion of their rights. Successful lobbying succeeded in causing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to get passed, and a public “us vs. them” campaign has repainted anyone who treads on the rights of a copyright holder as a criminal. For the first time in our history, violating the sanctity of copyright has become a criminal matter. (See 17 U.S.C. § 506, 18 U.S.C. § 2319).
Ladies and gentlemen, enter Reefer Madness.
Two anecdotal examples of corporate copyright holders’ reaction to the difficulty in policing copyright are the High Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI) cable, and the recent story concerning Creative Labs, succumbing to industry pressure and removing the ability to record FM radio from their MP3 players’ feature set (mind you, they’re not even doing this with future models, but actually crippling the feature in already purchased players via an update).
The very idea of the public domain is under attack, and copyright has gone from being a temporary monopoly to encourage creation, to a perpetual property right with corporate interest holding exclusive control of our society’s most valuable assets.
What to do...
We live in an era where decentralized networks allowing users to exchange files and information are being shut down because users can utilize these networks to exchange copyrighted files. Think about it — the idea that such a network might exist for the purpose of exchanging data in the public domain is not a relevant enough argument to sway our courts. Who can blame them, there is almost no public domain!
It is doubtful that enough people would be able to get together and overwhelm the lobbying and persuasive power of interests like Disney and Time Warner. Likewise, the protection of personal use in trading of digital music is all but a lost cause, and fair use has been dealt critical blow after blow.
Organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), are working hard to change the way we look at these issues, and alternative licensing as pioneered by the open source movement, and the GNU general public license, have worked to refine the way author’s release content. There is nobility left in leaving a creative offering at the feet of our culture.
Article comments
1 - Deano
I highly recommend checking out Creative Commons for an interesting new take on copyrights that permits license holders to allow some "degrees of usage" of their intellectual property.
I also heartily recommend Lawrence Lessig's excellent book "Free Culture".
2 - Rich Frankel
Deano, I totally agree on both counts (note the amazon book at the top!)Lessig is all but a holy man in this field, and much of my music goes out under a CC license. I'm actually glad you brought this up, because I think the nuts and bolts of what Creative Commons is doing, is very on target, but unfortunately would've resulted in an epic uber essay. I might make it the subject of my next article, since this one gives author's the why, but very little of the how.
Cheers.
3 - Bliffle
I agree. Flagrant abuse of copyright and patent by monopolistic renegade corporations works to the detriment of orginal authors and the general public alike.
4 - Snarkattack
I have a good friend who is passionate about this issue - I'll be forwarding the link to this article his way.
Note to self: must learn more about Creative Commons. Great article.