The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind by James Boyle » Chapter... - 0 views
-
-
Bill Genereux on 03 Oct 13This is true of all technology, by the way.
-
-
What the Net takes away with one hand, it often gives back with the other.
-
We should not assume that intellectual property and material property are the same in all regards.
- ...27 more annotations...
-
The goal of creating the limited monopoly called an intellectual property right is to provide the minimum necessary incentive to encourage the desired level of innovation
-
When someone takes your car, they have the car and you do not. When, because of some new technology, someone is able to get access to the MP3 file of your new song, they have the file and so do you. You did not lose the song. What you may have lost is the opportunity to sell the song to that person or to the people with whom they “share” the file. We should not be indifferent to this kind of loss; it is a serious concern.
-
we should pause before increasing the level of rights, changing the architecture of our communications networks, creating new crimes, and so on.
-
The downside dominates the field, the upside is invisible.
-
Until the triumph of DVDs, the videocassette rental market made up more than 50 percent of the movie industry’s revenues
-
A cheaper copying technology definitely caused losses. But it also provided substantial gains, gains that far outweighed the losses.
-
“fair use”
-
The defense is not “I trespassed on your land, but I was starving.” It is “I did not trespass on your land. I walked on the public road that runs through it, a road you never owned in the first place.”
-
“Yes, I trespassed on your land, which was wrong, I admit. But I was starving and looking for food. Please give me a break.” This is simply inaccurate.
-
One cannot start from the presumption that the rights holder has absolute rights over all possible uses and therefore that any time a citizen makes use of the work in any way, the rights holder is entitled to get paid or to claim “piracy” if he does not get paid.
-
Fair use
-
for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
-
purpose and character of the use
-
nature of the copyrighted work
-
amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
-
effect of the use upon the potential market
-
a multitude of dangers:
-
overly broad rights will chill speech, criticism, or scientific progress
-
discourage “follow-on” innovation;
-
hurts consumers or citizens while being less subject to antitrust regulation
-
We restrict the length of intellectual property rights. (At least, we used to. The framers thought it so important to do so that they put the need to have a limited term in the Constitution itself
-
when the content industries come asking for additional or new rights, for new penalties, for the criminalization of certain types of technology, we should take into account the gains that the Internet has brought them, as well as the costs
-
“Decompilation” was fair use
-
Without interoperability, we could never take our existing documents or spreadsheets or datasets and move to a new program, even if it was better
-
Internet Threat—“cheaper copying requires greater control
-
The Sony Court declared that because video recorders were capable of substantial noninfringing uses, the manufacturers of those devices were not guilty of contributory infringement.
-
-
A current example - DVD Recorders. This technology used to be widely available, but good luck finding one today.
-
