more on The Web and the law

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Gerry Faulhaber <gerry-faulhaber () mchsi com>
Date: August 29, 2005 10:19:27 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] The Web and the law


Dave [for IP, if you wish]

The LA Times editorial on copyright cases and file sharing is right  
on point.  The massive attempts to prosecute downloaders shows that  
copyright truly is a very blunt and very ineffective instrument for  
enforcing the rights of content producers against unrestricted file  
sharing by consumers.

In my view, the only sensible approach is a "relaxed DRM" method,  
such as iTunes uses.  The Fairplay DRM scheme permits limited copying  
to a number of devices that is more than ample for individuals  
exercising their fair use rights, but restrict the ability to file  
share via P2P.  Not sure whether there exists a similar CD solution  
(in contrast to digital download), but this is what we need to strike  
a balance between producers' and consumers' interests.  Clearly,  
copyright and its enforcement on final consumers is not going to do it.

Some have argued that P2P gives unknown artists a chance to become  
known, but again, this is a blunt instrument.  A far better way to do  
this is to have one or more central distributors who will permit  
listeners/viewers to download music/entertainment for free...but only  
the music of those artists who have given permission for free  
downloading would be available.  This could be a very popular (and  
very lucrative) service, and one that does not compromise the rights  
of artists/labels that don't wish to participate.  And the  
distributors would not be subject to copyright penalties.

You may not like the fact that the producers and distributors have  
exclusive rights to their creations, or you may not like the length  
of their period of exclusivity.  But the appropriate forum for that  
issue is Congress or even the courts.  Simply because the new  
technology makes it easy to be a cheesy sneak-thief doesn't make it  
OK to be one, despite the lame excuses we hear from the sneak- 
thiefs.  We should regard illegal downloading the same as we regard  
stealing towels from hotels.

Professor Gerald R. Faulhaber
Business and Public Policy Dept.
Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104


----- Original Message ----- From: "David Farber" <dave () farber net>
To: "Ip Ip" <ip () v2 listbox com>
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 7:24 AM
Subject: [IP] The Web and the law



> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com>
> Date: August 28, 2005 7:42:39 AM EDT
> To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net () warpspeed com>
> Subject: [Dewayne-Net] The Web and the law
> Reply-To: dewayne () warpspeed com
>
>
> <http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-  
> piracy28aug28,0,2328622.story?track=tothtml>
> EDITORIAL
>
> The Web and the law
>
> August 28, 2005
>
> HOLLYWOOD STUDIOS filed lawsuits last week accusing 286 people of   
> sharing movies online without permission. The point of the latest   
> claims, as with the hundreds that preceded them, was twofold: to   
> punish those who violate a copyright, and to educate the public at   
> large about the legal boundaries of downloading.
>
> As an educational tool, this type of lawsuit leaves something to be  
> desired. Only a fraction of the people sharing songs and movies   
> online illegally are sued, dulling the deterrent effect. At the  
> same  time, because so many claims have been filed (more than  
> 13,000 by the  movie and music industries since September 2003),  
> they no longer  attract much attention. Another problem is that  
> studios and labels do  not know the identity of a defendant when  
> they start pressing a  claim; the lawsuit eventually lands on the  
> person whose Internet  account was linked to pirated files. As a  
> result, defendants have  included such crowd-pleasers as a 12-year- 
> old girl, several  grandparents and at least one dead person.
>
> The resulting publicity hasn't garnered much sympathy for the  
> labels  or their cause. And critics of the lawsuits are right to  
> argue that  such actions aren't a long-term solution to the rampant  
> piracy that  the Internet enables. (Their argument that content  
> providers are  abusing copyright law to prevent fair use is a  
> harder case to make,  but worth hearing.) Entertainment companies  
> need to find more  effective ways to boost respect for copyrights  
> while embracing the  new technology to satisfy demand.
>
> Nevertheless, there are a couple of important principles that the  
> lawsuits advance, however fitfully.
>
> First, they show that the right way to protect copyrights is to  
> focus  on people who are violating them, not on the public at  
> large. By  contrast, some of the major record companies are also  
> trying to  combat piracy by switching to CD technology that resists  
> copying even  for legal purposes. This approach forces restrictions  
> on all CD  buyers in the name of stopping abuses by an unknown  
> fraction of music  fans.
>
> Second, the suits drive home the point that paying $40 a month for  
> high-speed Internet access does not entitle users to free copies of  
> everything they might want. Unfortunately, that point is still  
> lost  on many people, especially young people. Numerous defendants  
> have  been parents who either ignored or tolerated what their kids  
> were  doing on file-sharing networks, only to find themselves  
> paying a  premium for the hundreds of bootlegged songs stored on a  
> family  computer. (The labels typically demand $3,750 to $4,500 to  
> settle a  case, although copyright law allows them to seek up to  
> $150,000 per  illegal copy.)
>
> Clearly, these lawsuits inflict some collateral damage, not just  
> on  the industry but on notions of fair play and the law. When huge  
> media conglomerates sue thousands of individual Internet users,  
> they fuel  the argument that copyright law is just a tool for the  
> powerful, not  a means to improve society by encouraging creativity  
> and innovation.  But like anyone else, the studios are entitled to  
> defend their  rights. You can lament how blunt the instrument is,  
> but you can't  fault Hollywood for using it.
>
> Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as gerry-faulhaber () mchsi com
> To manage your subscription, go to
>  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- 
> people/



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/