The internet is the main location for copyright debate as it is where the majority of copyright infringement takes place. The internet was originally designed to be open, yet many people now believe it is far too open as copyrighted material is now extremely easy to get hold of. Due to programs such as uTorrent and LimeWire as well as websites such as The Pirate Bay it has become very easy for people to get things for free. In fact, The Pirate Bay has gained a lot of media attention recently- despite it being a database of torrents rather than a site hosting them.
Media companies are so defensive of their copyright that they have written letters to The Pirate Bay on multiple occasions, and these can be viewed here (alongside the websites rather humorous and outspoken reactions). I don't believe that torrenting is legal in any way - but I do believe that it has become a standard part of communication these days, and file sharing is just not likely to go away any time soon. Whilst it does deprive media companies of revenue - I do not think the problem is as drastic as people perceive, especially as music and DVD sales are currently rising. I think that the internet should be kept free and unrestricted, even if this does involve some forms of copyright breaching. Obviously, media producers do deserve to keep creative control over their property - but I do see it as an unnecessary restriction at times.
One such way in which it is particularly obstructive is involved in participatory or remix culture. How is it possible for culture to evolve through editing and remixing when media conglomerates block such things from breaking through due to their extremely possessive nature about copyright? Despite being rhetoric, the answer to this question simply is "it can't." In my opinion this is a sad state of affairs for our culture. We are being smothered by the companies in charge, who are desperately trying to stifle creativity and convergence just in case their copyright is broken.
What is more worrying and restrictive is the 2010 Digital Economy Act that our beloved UK Government has just passed. This Act is utter nonsense and is one that particularly worries me, and those others who believe in freedom on the internet. For those who don't know, the Act allows ISPs to disconnect people under suspicion of brekaing copyright law (without evidence), allows ISPs to begin 'bandwidth throttling' in order to slow down people's internet connections, and allows the UK Government to block any website they wish on the premise that it contains copyrighted material illegally. These draconian measures particularly worry me as they appear to be locking down the internet in a way that will simply ruin our modern day culture rather than block copyright infringement. After all, it is surely only a matter of time until a new way of downloading that is undetectable to the Government is discovered and made popular amongst internet users.
One way of meeting in the middle with copyright is the idea of Creative Commons Copyright. This means people can place a Creative Commons Copyright on their product which allows for flexibility. It allows people to use things commercially, or to take parts of their work and do what they like with it - provided they do the same with theirs. In fact, it is so easy to do this that I have put a CC Copyright onto this blog post.
I think that copyright is, on the whole good for media - but it is the ways in which it is enforced and policed which make the issue a difficult one. I agree that copyright is needed, but I believe that on public forums such as the internet where file-sharing is rife it should not be attacked in the way it has been. The internet should remain free, and participatory culture should remain untouched. Things like the Digital Economy Act are damaging to our society and the internet as a whole, and go as far to ruin all the work that things like Creative Commons have done to find a possible middle ground for copyright usage.
Copyrights and wrongs by Scott Kelly is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
Based on a work at scottkelly91.blogspot.com.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://scottkelly91.blogspot.com.
