Updated: 8/3/02; 12:20:17 AM.
The Daily Blog
Network Computing Site News and Stuff

syndicate this site

        

Tuesday, July 9, 2002

Here's a post from our own Lori MacVittie regarding a recent move by congress to give individuals the right to mislead others with the aim of protecting copyright ownership. It runs tangential to IT concerns now, but the issue of allowing individuals to act lawlessly in defense of the law can extend from music all the way to software code -- with unwelcome consequences, as I'm sure you can imagine.

If U.S. Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-CA) has his way, copyright holders may be provided with the authority to ignore the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act to protect their copyrights.

Berman aims to assist copyright holders in protecting themselves from the authoritarian and dictator's nightmare that is P2P technology.

Because the RIAA and MPAA cannot seem to find a way to address the disease, Berman instead intends to attempt to chip away at individual symptoms like a young child ineffectively scratching every pox that appears when inflicted with a childhood malady.

Berman states that "while P2P technology is free to innovate new and more efficient methods of distribution that further exacerbate the piracy problem, copyright owners are not equally free to craft technological responses. This is not fair and I believe Congress should free copyright creators to develop and deploy technological tools to address P2P piracy. We could do this by providing copyright owners with a safe harbor from liability for using such tools."

And copyright owners aren't free to innovate new and more efficient methods of stopping the problem? When did innovation become peculiar to non-copyright owners? Moreover, the illegal sharing of music and movies via P2P networks is simply symptomatic of a much larger issue involving pricing, distribution and the refusal of the cartel that is the music industry to advance with the times. While the music industry decries the sharing of MP3s, many of those who engage in this illicit practice cite the unavailability of individual songs, the outrageously high cost of CDs and the desire to preview new music before purchasing.

In fact, many music aficionados will preview music via a P2P network and then purchase the CD, citing the loss of quality inherent in the process of ripping music from CD to the MP3 format. Others simply want the ability to purchase one song and refuse to pay for an entire CD full of music they do not want. Some are simply not going to pay regardless, and quite frankly you can't count that as "lost revenue". You weren't going to get it anyway.

Rather than shutting down every P2P network that appears, it might behoove the music industry to consider these desires as an avenue to generate additional revenue. This "we are above the law" tactic proposed by Congressman Berman is simply a roadmap on how to infuriate your customers and spread the disease further in protest. Two wrongs, sir, does not make a right. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

The potential for abuse under this proposal is astounding. What type of copyright holder can claim sanctuary? Books? Music? Movies? Code?

The good Congressman needs to remember that scratching at the chicken pox makes them spread faster.

-- Lori MacVittie



Posted by Network Computing at 12:00:26 AM


© Copyright 2002 CMP Media LLC.
 
July 2002
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Jun   Aug



site surf