How Does The Ethics Violate The Dmca Code Of Ethics

How Does The Ethics Violate The Dmca Code Of Ethics
DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) is a part of the Copyright Law which prevents internet
service providers to be held accountable for copyright infringement that was done by one of the
users in their networks. The owners of the materials continuously monitor the internet; they identify
individuals who seem to distribute their content without a license. These individuals who did
commit the copyright infringement will be held responsible for the damages, not the service
provider. DMCA is created to discourage users from freely distributing online creative content
without permission from the owner or proper credits given to the owner.
One of the ethical implications to consider when engaging in actions that violate the DMCA is that
the industry could be losing money due to some of their products being distributed for free on the
world wide web, also they could be spending a lot of money in setting up online piracy–detecting
software to prevent these illegal activities from happening. Every person who illegally downloads
copies of online content is costing these industries monetary losses. These contents are not just "free
for all," DMCA violations hurt people who are involved in the making of these contents such as the
entertainment, media, journalism and publishing industries.
Copying ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It is like saying that if you cannot afford a TV, it gives you a right to steal it. That is simply
unethical. Violating the DMCA negatively impacts a lot of involved parties. The movie industry is
experiencing a decrease in revenues and so they have to increase their prices. Which in turn, impacts
the legitimate consumers who are experiencing higher costs. It also impacts consumers ethical
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Impact Of Technology On Society's Society Comes With A Price
The immeasurable, ever–accelerating development of technology in today 's society comes with a
price. Freedom is a double–edged sword; as we move closer to the realm of unlimited possibility,
the task of regulating the use of technology becomes taller and taller. When it comes to governing
and policing the infinite expanse that is the Internet, it is not just a question of "how?" but "who?"
Who is responsible for the regulation of the electronic universe, and how can it best be regulated
while respecting the rights of all creators, both of the copyright–holding and non–copyright–holding
variety?
In the early days of the World Wide Web, the roles of producer and consumer were well defined,
with most users filing into the "consumer" column. But Web 2.0 changed everything–– users started
to become both consumers and producers, as file–sharing and media–uploading sites, social media,
blogs, and the like became mainstream. With sites such as YouTube and Facebook serving mostly as
platforms––– foundations upon which their users could build and share content––– the lines
governing roles and responsibilities began to blur: as users began to take control, who was to be
tasked with controlling the users? Copyright was perhaps the biggest of the many elephants in the
newly–created virtual room. With many of the biggest websites geared towards the posting and
widespread consumption of content, it became imperative and increasingly impossible to ensure that
the content the users

The Effects of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of...
The Effects of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998
The verb copy is defined as "To reproduce an original." (Webster, 57–58) This idea of copying has
been around for hundreds of years. In the current time, laws have had to be written to protect against
the idea of copying someone else's work. There are ways around the copyright laws. "A copy is in
violation of a copyright if the original can be "perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated
by or from the copy, directly or indirectly." As years go on, copyrights become more and more
specific as to what uses and kinds of copying are covered. (Baase, 239)
Copyrights, in general, have been around for well over 200 years. "The first U.S. ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
One of these exceptions is the idea of fair use. The fair use doctrine says that uses such as criticism,
comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research are fair game because if they weren't, it
would be violating freedom of speech. There are four factors taken into consideration when seeing if
a certain use is under the fair use doctrine:
1. The purpose and nature of the use.
2. The nature of the copyrighted work.
3. The amount and significance of the portion used.
4. The effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. (Baase, 241–
242)
There are several cases dealing with the fair use doctrine under the Digital Millennium Copyright
Act. One of the more famous cases dealing with this act is the Sony verses Universal Studios. In this
case, Sony had developed new recording technology called the Betamax. The Betamax could record
movies off of the television to be watched at a later time. Universal Studios saw this as copyright
infringement. Sony saw this case as fair use. This was taken to the Supreme Court and by weighing
the four factors of fair use, the court ruled in Sony's favor saying that recording a movie for viewing
at a later time was considered fair use. (Baase, 242–243)
This case with Sony verses Universal Studios is not the only example where the fair use doctrine has
been tested. A very famous example is that of the idea of Napster being

Positive Rights : Social, Economic, Social And Social Rights
4[15]
a) According to Wikipedia definition "A claim right (positive right) is a right which entails
responsibilities, duties, or obligations on other parties regarding the right–holder. In contrast, a
liberty right (negative right) is a right which does not entail obligations on other parties, but rather
only freedom or permission for the right–holder." The two are inconsistent. Positive rights are
acknowledged to the detriment of negative rights. They can't exist together, since they are perfect
inverses. Therefore, a person is allowed to do all and just the things he/she isn't obliged to avoid,
and obliged to do all and just the things he isn't allowed to forgo. positive rights are by and large
harder to legitimize and require more perplexing moral substantiation than negative rights. Most
political rights are negative rights. The right to not be tortured, the privilege to freedom of speech,
the privilege to not be oppressed, the privilege to live (or, all the more decisively, the privilege to not
be murdered). Then again, there are a few rights, particularly Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
that require some type of activity from others. The privilege to free education requires the state to
provide or invest in training. Same with the privilege to healthcare services.
b) The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was marked into law by President Clinton on
October 28, 1998. The enactment executes two 1996 World Intellectual Property Organization
(WIPO)

Digital Technology And Its Effects On The World
Since the 1990's the world has experienced vast improvements in technology and what seems as an
endless expansion of the Internet, and as a result, laws and legislation have had to evolve was well.
Technologists and policymakers exist in "two worlds, "two cultures" when it comes to viewing a
problem and developing a solution. Nevertheless, technologist and policymakers have been up
against some very complex issues such as how to control piracy of copyrighted digital media.
However, copyright owners have sought out legal means to protect their intellectual assets. In recent
years copyright laws have been in effect to strike a balance between protecting the rights of authors,
artist and copyright owners, and according to the U.S. Constitution, to "promote the Progress of
Science and useful Arts." Digital technology, unlike analog technology that preceded it, can make
large copies in real–time without the degradation in quality. However, as a response to these
capabilities of digital technology, policymakers had to create a system of digital rights management
(DRM) and other technical deterrents where digital content owners could exert control over media
usage. In response to these complex issues, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1998
was passed. Digital Rights Management (DRM) is a systematic method of controlling access to
copyrighted material. The purpose of DRM is to prevent the unauthorized redistribution of
copyrighted digital content, in other words,

Is Copy Protection Cracking Ethical? Essay
Is Copy Protection Cracking Ethical?
Introduction
There are many types of hackers in the world. One group of hackers focuses on breaking copy
protection schemes. Copy protection schemes prevent the illegal copying of software, music, etc. By
cracking these schemes, people are then able to use and copy the item without the copy protection
preventing or hindering their use. This process is commonly known as cracking and the hackers
involved in the process are known as crackers. Cracking is commonly viewed as an illegal act in
many countries as it is typically used to steal copies of the copyrighted item. However, there are
benefits to cracking. It can remove the inconveniences the copy protection scheme imposes on users
and in some ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However, these checks can cause problems for users. Incompatibilities with CD drives can cause
false failures upon checking the validity of a CD. This can prevent legal users from properly using
the software that they have purchased.
Another form of copy protection is used on movie DVD's. The movie is encrypted and flags are set
to indicate that the DVD is a copyrighted work. Without the appropriate key, a DVD movie cannot
be played back. In order to supply software/hardware that can decrypt the movie, the vender must
purchase a license and must respect the copyright flag and the restrictions it places on how the
content can be used. This model works perfectly well. Users can play the DVD movie in their DVD
players and on their personal computer with the appropriate software and hardware. Both of which
typically come with the purchase of a new personal computer or in the same upgrade kit. The
problem with this technology is this: What if a vender does not create a legally licensed product for
your personal computer's operating system? Widely used operating systems have support (MacOS
TM, Microsoft Windows TM). However, many people are beginning to use Linux as a desktop
operating system. Since Linux is an open source operating system, many users want free software
for their system. Unfortunately, a license to legally create a DVD movie player is not free. The user
has

Copyright Of Copyright And Copyright
Copyright policy violations have been a major talking point in the media in recent years. Copyright
concerns largely grew in the early 2000's due to a popular music sharing program called LimeWire.
LimeWire allowed people to illegally download, or pirate, the music they were interesting in
listening to for free. Limewire launched in 2000 and was shut down in 2010 due to a "permanent
injunction issued by a New York–based federal court" (Gearlog, 2010). This injuction brought
copyright infringement to the forefront of the headlines as the Recording Industry Association of
America (RIAA) attempted to file a lawsuit for $75 trillion. This was settled to $105 million, but
they publicity of such a large lawsuit brought more debate to the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Furthermore, with few exceptions, the "Digital Millen[n]ium Copyright Act (DMCA) prevents the
removal of any copy protection methods employed by a media publisher" (Dachis, 2012). To
summarize, under no circumstances can you replicate a movie; nor can you use or distribute
software that allows a person to bypass the encryption on anti–piracy software. Now that we know
what copyright policy is, we can investigate the reason people choose to pirate content rather than
pursue legal means of obtainment. One of the leading opinions is that piracy is a service problem.
Motherboard writer, Derek Mead, states, "According to a new piracy study funded by
NBCUniversal, it appears that a lot of pirates are downloading movies as a matter of convenience"
(Mead, 2013). Forbes.com writer, Paul Tassi, supports this theory by stating that "'[p]iracy is a
service problem.' Valve's Gabe Newell said that years ago, touting the success of Steam, his online
video game distribution service. The premise is that while piracy is appealing because it's free, it's
also appealing because it's easy" (Tassi, 2014). These statements clearly describe the way in which
piracy, to a great extent, is caused not by people intent on causing harm – but people enticed by
convenience.
With an understanding about the related laws and why people pirate, we can now discuss how piracy
is currently being contested. There are three primary tools

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act Essay
In our present day in age, technology and the internet has made it very easy to find and obtain
music, movies, television shows, and other media forms without having to pay a fee. In recent years,
the music and movie industry, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the
Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) initiated a campaign to combat the illegal sharing
and downloading of files, songs, and movies. These illegal files are usually transferred through users
and peer–to–peer networks including LimeWire, FrostWire, Bearshare, Kazaa, and most importantly
Napster, which initiated it all. The illegal files are not only limited to music and movies but also
various types of pirated software, such as Microsoft Office or Adobe Photoshop, that are
accompanied with serial numbers and instructional manuals. The RIAA and MPAA argued that if an
individual exerts much time, effort, and money into a piece of art or software that they created, they
should be thoroughly compensated. Therefore, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act was created
and instituted by the United States Congress to restrict internet piracy by banning the fabrication,
allocation, and illegal distribution of pirated materials. In addition, the DMCA was used to
accommodate the constant changes of the growing digital age into current copyright laws that are
usually reserved for books, magazines, or articles. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act is just and
protects the rights of the artists and

Sopa, Dmca, And Hipaa
Alexander Lau
ITP – 125
Final Paper
May 7, 2016
SOPA, DMCA, and HIPAA
With the introduction of computers and the internet opens limitless possibilities for the world to
become so much more interconnected and interactive. However, that same limitless potential is both
a blessing and a curse. The open internet is a system that allows for unlimited access to almost any
sort of information. That same openness makes security for one's self difficult and there isn't anyone
who is completely secure. The introduction of the internet for broad use and public consumption
also came with the federal government's attempts to prevent the theft of personal information. In the
late 1990s, President Bill Clinton signed into law two provisions to protect copyright and
affordability of healthcare: the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act. In 2011, a bill was introduced into the United States House of
Representatives called the Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA) to combat online copyright infringement
and online trafficking in counterfeit goods. Obviously the DMCA and SOPA have much more in
common as they deal with copyright infringement. As such, they also have a profound impact on
information security. HIPAA is important as well as it keeps confidential information like medical
records to only be accessed by patients and medical professionals. All three of them touched on an
important subject, information security, that warrants the

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Failure to Protect and Abuses of the Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act Most
laws are passed by the congress with intent to either limit the government 's power or to benefit the
country and it 's people. This was the thought behind the ill fated and commonly criticized The
DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act). Its purpose, similar to its predecessor, the Copyright
Act itself, was to protect the copyright owners from the big scary pirates, thus protecting their
profits and live–hood. It largely succeeds without attracting a lot of opposition with the exception of
Section 1201. The reasoning behind Section 1201 was to stop the pirates ' ability to circumvent the
copy protection measures used by content produces and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There are a few exceptions written into the law, but in practice, they do very little to protect
consumers and only serve to benefit the copyright holders while simultaneously eliminating
competition and fair use. The main argument in support of this section, is that it prevents the pirates
from copying or obtaining tools to copy the copyrighted works. Instead, it 's a different story all
together. In close to 20 years in existence, this law clearly failed to stop the pirates as TV shows,
movies, music and other content keep showing up online without the copyright holders consent. In
other words, if these provisions worked as intended, we would not see any pirated movies online or
hear about stolen music download. Despite all of this, Interstellar was the most pirated movie in
2015 according to Variety. This clearly shows that Section 1201 failed miserably at it 's intended
goal as pirates continue to break the protection without worrying about the Section 1201. Even
without this section, they would still be breaking the law and thus be liable for the penalties as the
Copyright Law itself which already protects the works. There is also another side of this provision, a
side where everyone else is paying the price of protecting the copyright holders. Supporters state
that the law provides sufficient exemptions for scholars and researches when working on encryption
and DRM. However, there are numerous examples of the abuse of Section 1201. One of the

Television, Television And Public Places
1a. It is very important to draw comparison between the internet, library, television and public
places as a result of the fact the internet can also be considered or viewed as a public place where
information can be obtained freely at any point in time, and this makes it very important to know
what the law says about this disseminating information to the general public with respect to the first
amendment. Looking at this various medium i.e libraries, television and public places and what the
law stipulates according to the United State constitution the first amendment expressly forbids
against depriving citizens their right to freedom of speech, of press, right to assemble and petition
the government. But in this case emphasis is placed on the freedom of speech. The entire medium
stated above has differences between them and the difference between them how the freedom of
speech law applies to each one of them, for example the library consist of various material including
the press, which has been granted lots flexibility when it comes to freedom of speech been the oldest
media but the content available in the library is still controlled by the owner of the library so that it
does not infringe on any law. Likewise the television the government has set up various body to
control what is being aired to the general public, but it does not have any control of privately owned
television providers such as charter, dish etc. 1b. The internet is similar to the library, television

The Infringement Of The Copyright Infringement
1) Does that forwarding email institute for copyright infringement:
The copyright in an email is determined by its content. Forwarding emails is generally not
considered to be a breach of copyright, but, one should carefully consider the nature of the content
of the email and whether it is appropriate to forward it, as other legal issues, such as privacy and
confidentiality, also apply.
According to Copyright Act, it considers sending emails as an act of communication, although, the
issue with emails is that they are easy to copy and forward to my people. Distribution is normally a
restricted right of the copyright owner and to do without the permission of the copyright owner
would be a breach of copyright (Darrow & Ferrera, 2007). Fair use occupies half of the copyright
law and grants limited right to use other's works, regardless of the approval. The most common
remedy for copyright infringement is awarding damages to the copyright owner.
2) Oppose the text–to–speech feature? What markets for your work, if any, might be adversely
affected?
An audiobook, which is a voice performance of a text by an actor, who is a human being, introduces
all the emotional aspects and understate real life signs into the reading to make the story sound alive
while being listened (Darrow & Ferrera, 2007). On the other hand, text to speech uses an inhuman
computer voice to simply repeat the written text as the imitated spoken word. Thus, reading any
book out loud may establish an

Computers And The New Wave Parts Manufacturing
Neokat Liburd
Mr. Sirois
Civics Honors
6/2/15
How do I Qwikscope w/ 3D Printed Guns
Microwaves, computers, cell phones, what do they all have in common? desktop fabricators.
desktop fabricators have paved the way for engineers by making the impossible possible. They are
the new wave parts manufacturing because of their intelligent manufacturing process and part by
part building applications. desktop fabricating also known as "3D Printing " or "Additive
Manufacturing" is a build process in which products are built layer by layer using blueprints that are
uploaded digitally into the computer. The thing we can build today with 3d printing were not even
possible before.
But with great power comes great responsibility. With all this ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
With desktop fabricating, surgeons can produce mockups of parts of their patient 's body which
needs to be operated upon. desktop fabricating makes it possible to make a part from scratch in just
hours. It allows designers and developers to go from flat screen to exact part. Nowadays almost
everything from aerospace components to toys are getting built with the help of desktop fabricators.
desktop fabricating is also used for jewelry and art, architecture, fashion design, art, architecture and
interior design." For more personal printing, recreational item for hobbyists are made. Things like
missing board game pieces, plastic cups, other home essentials, and cool collectibles impossible to
build conventionally like asymmetrical tops. Most domestic desktop fabricators are priced from
250$–2000$ and is definitely a worthy investment for hobbyists and inventors. The best part is that
any person can learn desktop fabricating and CAD (meaning Computer Aided Design). It only takes
weeks to get familiar with the processes involved using tools like Sketchup and Blender. So 3D
printing becomes a very viable option for manufacturers everywhere, but is this not always good.
As with all technology 3D printers have risks associated with them. A big factor in these risk is how
it is digitally orienting allowing for downloads and digital transfers of blueprints. Thats all well and
good but what about illegal transfers and stealing designs? It has

Napster: The Devil in Disguise
In the year of 1999 sound recordings were changed to a whole new world. Sound recordings stepped
into new hands known as Napster. Napster, to other sound recording companies, was like the devil
in disguise, ruining the sound recordings profits and business. Napster started something for
consumers but soon came to an end.
What is Napster? According to SearchCIO, Napster is a controversial application that allows people
to share music over the Internet without having to purchase their own copy on CD. Not only that,
Napster allowed people to download the music on to their own CD and could be played from their
own server and use chatting forums. (Rouse) Napster was created by a college dropout named
Shawn Fanning and one of his friends who was only nineteen. He became quickly popular on
college campuses. Some colleges were banning Napster due to the high bandwidth demands.
(Rouse) By the year of 2000, Napster had already had over 26 million users. Basically, according to
The Observer Napster was programmed to go into someone else's music files and choose the songs
they wanted and download them on to their computer, which also known as peer–to peer or file is
sharing. (Lamont)
Napster may have been popular with free lancers but not with other sound recording companies.
According to Implications for the Digital Music Library, members of the music industry filed a
lawsuit against Napster by accusing Napster of copyright infringement. (Crews) One of the biggest
violations that

Essay The Church of Scientology: Copyright vs. Free Speech
The Church of Scientology: Copyright vs. Free Speech
Abstract: In 1995, the Church of Scientology sued a number of parties, including the Washington
Post, in an attempt to prevent the circulation of secret documents about the "religion." This paper
examines both sides of this issue, explores the implications to copyright law and the First
Amendment, and describes the actual results of the case.
The Church of Scientology is a global organization with over 270 churches or missions worldwide.
For decades, it has possessed followers with an almost fanatical devotion to their leader, L. Ron
Hubbard. Since the advent of the Internet, the Church has begun to resort to various legal actions to
maintain the secrecy of their "scriptures." ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The raid garnered media attention the next day; a Washington Post article quoted Lerma as saying
that the cult seized "400 computer disks, four computer hard drives, a computer and a scanner" [4].
On August 22, the Church of Scientology issued a press release announcing that they had sued the
Washington Post for the return of the documents sent to them by Arnie Lerma. In the release,
spokeswoman Leisa Goodman claimed that the Post "violated fundamental journalistic integrity by
conspiring with lawless elements on the Internet to harm the religion of Scientology" [5]. The next
day, an attorney for the paper responded by saying that "the documents at issue, which have been
widely distributed over the Internet, were properly obtained by The Post from a public court file, a
common and appropriate form of news–gathering. And the limited quotations included in The Post's
story are well within the bounds of 'fair use' doctrine under copyright law."
Fair use, a well–established doctrine of copyright law, is explicitly stated in Title 17, Section 107 of
the U.S. Code. It protects copying "for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting,
teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research." Also very relevant
to the issues raised by this lawsuit is the final

Garcia Vs Google
YouTube is the best source for examples of free speech. Ever since the day the website open,
YouTube has become the source to publish videos. People make videos on any topic. Most of the
time, YouTube is full of parodies made by independent content creators. Many of these videos create
a follow on the person who made them. There are times in which people publish a video that creates
a controversy. When Innocence of Muslims was posted on YouTube, it causes a problem in which
people believe the video provoked violence. This video creates many problems for example riots in
Muslim countries, and supposedly Benghazi. Besides having an offensive message, it made the
people involved with this project to fear for their lives. Innocence of Muslims is ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
She stated that she had to control the video and that the director and producer had all of it. Garcia
felt like it violated her rights as she was also involved creating the video, and has a voice to express
her opinion on the final product. According to an article by Benjamin Boroughf, he states that "the
resulting high cost of human review means 'the copyright owner may no longer be the least–cost–
avoider for detecting' online infringement". This article mostly focuses on copyright claims, but it
also analysis the user's rights. The person who uploads a video on YouTube has less power on it, due
to copyright infringement. Other people who were involved with the video can also remove it from
YouTube, just because they had some kind of an involvement with it. The supreme court case of
Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc. made the verdict that Google has the right to keep or
delete the video. No matter if the video is stolen, it belongs to the website. The Digital Millennium
Copyright Act protects YouTube from other media outlet from taking away its ability to get rid of a
video. In order to have a video removed, there have to be four factors that give the offensive to have
the right to take away a motion picture from someone else. According to Peter Dang," the court must
take a case–by–case approach generally guided by a four–factor balancing test to determine if a

Dancing Baby Revelation : Consideration On Notice And Take...
Dancing Baby Revelation:
Consideration on Notice and Take Down Procedure under Chinese Copyright Law
Qianhui Zhang
Introduction
On February 7, 2007, a 29–second video was uploaded onto YouTube by Stephanie Lenz. The video
was about her two toddlers pushing a push–toy and "dancing" along with the song "Let's go
crazy"by Prince. "About four seconds into the video, Lenz asks her thirteen month–old son 'what do
you think of the music?' after which he bobs up and down while holding a push toy."
As the publishing administrator of Prince, Universal Music Corporation hired Sean Johnson to
review the videos for possible copyright infringing of Prince's song. Johnson's work was to evaluate
whether Prince's song was a major part of the video or ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
U.S. Copyright Act provided clear instructions of Internet behavior. ISP safe harbor was even
adopted by Chinese legislature. Notice–take down procedure was one of the ways that a copyright
holder can raise to protect his/her right when infringing of the right happens.
However, things do not always go as people wish. "Takedowns often mask ulterior motives", "such
as business rivalry or religious bias. Copyright owners are sending takedown notifications by the
millions". "Lenz brought up a challenge to take down notifications by the support of fair use. This
was the first successful, real claim attacking good–faith belief in ten years since the DMCA was
enacted".
While U.S. take–down notification receivers can use fair use provision to stand up for themselves,
Chinese copyright owners can file take down notifications as long as they have "(1) Name, contact
information and address of the owner; (2) The names of the infringed works, performance and
audio–visual products that are required to be deleted or the names of the web addresses whose link
is required to be cut off; and (3) The preliminary certification materials on infringement." Part I of
this paper illustrates how U.S. and Chinese law making body solve the problem of copyright owners
abusing the right to file take down notifications. In this part, the problem now existing in the
Internet IP world will be unveiled. As to how each different country is dealing the problem,

Impact Of The Digital Millennium Copyright Act On...
Impact of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act on Copyright Enforcement and Fair Use
Jean–Paul Muyshondt
University of North Carolina Wilmington
Abstract
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 has changed the focus of copyright enforcement
away from the act of copyright infringement and toward the act of circumvention of the
technologies used to protect the rights of digital media owners. Additionally, the act has had adverse
effects that outweigh the benefits that it provides.
Key Words: copyright, DMCA, DRM, ethics, fair use, legal/societal impact.
1. Introduction
Prior to the 1990s, United States copyright legislation, like the media that it protected, had remained
relatively unchanged. The advancement of digital technologies, specifically the advent of the
Internet and the increasing ability to easily exchange digital media, prompted a change in copyright
law. This change came in the form of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The act
extends the protections given to copyright holders. In order to provide this additional protection, the
DMCA also has adverse effects. This paper will explore copyright law in the United States and
discuss the positive and negative effects of the DMCA, as well as some of the ethical implications
associated with it.
2. Background
2.1. Copyright law prior to 1998 and the need for change
Copyright laws in the United States can trace their roots to the Constitution, where Congress was
granted the power "To

Viacom International V. Grokster Case
Following the matter further, in June 2010, Viacom International, added to its claim with YouTube,
is involved analogous claims of trademark infringement by sales of counterfeit. Stanton omitted
claims of trademark infringement, dilution claims against the other advertisers and other listed
practices. He then ruled, yet again, in favor of YouTube in the 2nd United States Circuit Court of
Appeals in New York revived Viacom's case that adjourned in April. This ruling, igniting still more
venom with more statements, according to Reuter's, Viacom's plans to appeal, saying in the
following "This ruling ignores the opinions of the higher courts and completely disregards the rights
of creative artists." Google's general counsel, Kent Walker, was delighted ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
I am witnessing people fighting for what they believe is right and paying the cost to pursue the
matter to the end. So, when lawsuit resumed, on April 18, 2013, Viacom, presented another angle to
the table to dispute their case using, The Grokster Case, Metro–Goldwyn–Mayer Studios Inc. v.
Grokster, Ltd., they presented a case that involved peer–to–peer file–sharing networks and violating
the safe harbor provisions of copyright thief violating the (DMCA) "Digital Age of the Millennium
Act." This charges were brought red flags to the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York against YouTube, Inc. and filed by Viacom Int'l Inc., on a remand from the
Second Circuit Court of Appeals. However, in light of the tedious claims of Viacom, the courts, did
give the notices to YouTube to remove the material that violate the DMCA, all monetary relief and

Essay on 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act
1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Right before a movie starts in your theatre, you're subjected to many advertisements. One that
always stood out was the piracy campaign ad which gave a perspective on the downloading of
movies from an off set worker. His distinctive message was that, movie stars are paid exorbitant
amounts of money but the on and off set workers are not. By downloading the movie or "screener"
in advanced, you're really hurting the people behind the magic. So what does this have to do with
us? Under the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act it states that copyright holders can send
cease–and–desist letters to Internet providers when subscribers are discovered sharing unauthorized
material. Has our privacy been ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I believe internet piracy has created a new topic that wont be resolved by the end of this paper or
anytime soon. In the case of the RIAA going after certain internet service providers i.e. Verizon, has
led me to believe that even though countless acts of piracy are being committed daily, by
prosecuting the people without their full consent still constitutes as a violation. The question is how
far can the law take you?
When Napster closed its gates in 2000, there were 20 million users angry and confused, leaving
many people to blame Metallica: the iconic heavy metal group. They felt that the music that was
being distributed violated the intellectual property law. The group blamed Napster (in its free form
idea), not Napster Inc. (today) that they were not being compensated for and also one of the major
reasons for the slumping record sales. The only problem I see with this is that the "slaying of one
enemy only to seed the field with a thousand new opponents – opponents who are, not indecently, its
own best customers." (Cave and Quistgaard) Programs like Kazaa, Gnutella, WinMX and a
thousand more just like its predecessor have one key difference: there is no central server. This
means now the record label cannot individually sue. Or can they?
The approach to this problem now is by individually fining people. "The RIAA recently settled
lawsuits against four college students for $12,500 to $17,500 each." (Graham, 2003) The idea they
are trying to

A & M Records Vs. Napster Essay
A&M Records v. Napster is a landmark case in which the application of intellectual property laws
has forever impacted contemporary culture with regards to digital works. The legal issues and
applicable laws presented in the instant case resulted in a holding, which set forth a precedent that
has influence the mode and means of digital works distribution. The outcome of Napster affects both
businesses and individuals. Napster, a free online file sharing network, allowed peers to share digital
files directly with each other by way of connections through its software and system. The no cost
peer–to–peer sharing gained popularity, particularly with trendy music. A&M Records took notice
of the free digital music downloads and brought suit against Napster for direct, contributory, and
vicarious copyright infringements (Washington University School of Law, 2013). First, it is
important to discuss the direct, contributory and vicarious infringement claims against Napster.
Direct copyright infringement claims are based on a breach of a copyright owners' exclusive rights
to the copyrighted work(s). A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004, 1013 (9th Cir.
2001). Napster was found liable for this because the users used its platform to upload and download
copyrighted music, thus infringing on two exclusive rights: reproduction and distribution. Id at
1014. Contributory copyright infringement claims are based on secondary infringers who have
either actual or

Judge Chavez And The Case
I am Judge Chavez and the case presented to the courts today is Leia I. Organa v. Sith Publications,
Inc. Leia I. Organa is a photographer who specializes in news events and its historical significance.
In this case, Organa accuses Sith Publications of misusing her work. Copyright for photographers
means owning property. With ownership, you get certain exclusive rights to that property. For
photographic copyrights, the ownership rights include:
(1) To reproduce the photograph;
(2) To prepare derivative works based upon the photograph;
(3) To distribute copies of the photograph to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by
rental, lease, or lending
(4) To display the photograph publicly
This can be found in the U.S. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Question
I. Who owns the copyright in a photograph once it is taken?
In general, the person behind the camera who takes the photograph owns the photo. An exception is
when the image falls into the "work–made–for–hire" category. A work–made–for–hire relationship
is created in two situations: (1) the photographer is an employee hired to take photographs for the
employee, or (2) the photographer is hired to provide photographs for collective works or
compilations and signs a written agreement that specifically states that the work is to be considered
a work made for hire. Therefore, freelance photographers are subjected to work–for–hire status only
when they agree to it by contract.
Fair use is the right to use copyrighted materials without the copyright owner's permission.
Permitting limited and reasonable uses without permission as long as they do not prejudice the
copyright owner's rights or interfere with normal exploitation of the work. Thus, fair use is intended
to allow the unauthorized use of copyrighted materials for the benefit of society, believing such use
serves a higher purpose. But fair use has its limits, too. Section 107 of the Copyright Act states that:
The fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or
by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news
reporting, teaching (including

Digital Millennium Copyright Act At The Embassy Level
There are not many risks involved with the Digital Millennium Copyright act at the Embassy level,
but there are a few. The only issues we could possible run into is that a single user illegally
downloads copyrighted material. There are several policies and procedure put into place to stop this
kind of abuse through our systems. One good thing is that the OSP to our Embassy will not be help
accountable for any copyright violations as long as there procedures are in place. Another issue that
may be a concern from the point of view of DMCA environment would be our licensed products
that we use in our production environment. All of our devices will be properly licensed as required
by law and so as not to infringe upon and titles in the DMCA. "Title III of the DMCA is called the
Computer Maintenance Competition Assurance Act. It allows computer repair technicians to make
temporary, limited copies of computer software while they're repairing a computer. The computer
must already have a copy of the software program on it" (Grama, Purdue University Security Policy
and Compliance Director Joanna Lyn, 2011). With this provision in place we will not infringe on
any copyright laws while we are repairing anything as long as things are properly licensed when we
are finished. Along with illegal downloads, and licensing concerns, there is also the risk of having
our classified information leaked to the internet, or even an ill–informed employee that has taken
pictures or videos of

Violation Of Copyright And The Motion Picture Industry
In Violation of the Copyright Issues in the Motion Picture Industry
Nanami Maruyama
I. Introduction
Motion picture industry is big business in the United States and global entertainment market.
According to Statista research, it is predictable that the film entertainment business will create 35.3
billion U.S. dollars in revenue by 2019. Among studios, Buena Vista accomplished the most in 2016
it held the biggest piece of pie, around 26 percent, and produced the highest box office revenue,
more than 3 billion U.S. dollars. Warner Bros. represented closely 17 percent of the entire box office
revenue in North America, and 20th Century Fox held around 13 percent of the whole market share.
Conversely, there are some issues in the motion ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Be that as it may, truly, the dropping of this suit as a result of this dismissal motion is not an
appropriate response to Star Trek fans. But on the other hand, there are the insanely strict rules Star
Trek fans must follow if they want to make a fan film. There are many rules, and after this lawsuit,
these rules increased in number and became more and more strict.
III. Copyright Law and Trials in Japanese Motion Picture Industry
Associates of anime 's frequently obsessive international fan base often translate and to put subtitle
Japanese releases, uploading pirated versions for free online media, cutting into DVD sales and
prospective revenue from box office releases. The film productions have replied by bringing
forward overseas release dates for all capacity screens.
Now, so many Japanese films are illegally uploaded on the Internet and a lot of piracy DVDs are
available. For instance, Toho Co., Ltd. which is the Japanese motion picture production and
distribution company released "Your Name (Kimi no Na wa)" in Japan on August 26, 2016. The
worldwide total lifetime grosses of the film are more than 35 U.S. dollars on May 7. And now the
movie is the highest

Law 338 Summative Coursework
LAW 338 Summative Coursework
Table of Contents
1 Authorisation Required for Clickable Links to Freely Available Work on Other Websites? 1.1
Communication 1.2 To the public 1.3 New public 1.4 Svensson pros 1.5 Svensson cons 1.6 Liability
of ISPs 1.7 Liability of Search Engines
2 If Clickable Links Transport to a Broadcast of a Work 2.1 Communication to the Public 2.2
Different Technical Means
3 Embedded links
4 Not–for–profit Basis
5 If Copyright Work on the Original Website is Restricted by Technical Means 5.1 Deep–linking 5.2
Contractual conditions 5.3 Crticism
6 Reform
7 Conclusion
Q3.
1.Authorisation Required for Clickable Links to Freely Available Work on Other Websites?
Copyright in a work can be infringed by copying it, issuing copies of it to the public or making an
adaptation of it . It is apparent that hyperlinks are not a material form of a copy, but merely an
electronic link to another site. Authorisation would only be required for clickable links, if it is
substantiated that such links would infringe a copyright held by the original content provider. For
our current purposes, clickable links shall be examined in line with the right of communication to
the public.
1.1 Communication
Copyright laws apply to communication through electronic transmission if the work that is copied is
intended to be retrieved and used by someone else, irrespective of whether members of the public
avail themselves of that opportunity . An

Copyright Law On The Planet
"Only one thing is impossible for God: To find any sense in any copyright law on the planet" (Mark
Twain). The concept of copyright in the United States has a large history. The first form of copyright
in the United States stems from Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution in the year
1787, where "Congress shall have power . . . to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by
securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings
and discoveries." These "exclusive rights" were originally extremely limited, as the first Copyright
Act of 1790 only applied to maps, charts, and books. As time has advanced, copyright practices in
the United States have undergone several reforms, among the most recent being the infamous
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1998. Said act updated United States law to the
requirements of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), such as placing limitations on
the liability of online service providers for copyright violations made by users. The act, however,
has been a subject of controversy in recent times, as some content creators abuse it to control access
to their content. This is accomplished through methods such as copyright trolling, in which the
copyright holder produces works solely for the purpose of litigation rather than distribution.
Oftentimes, these practices are thought to be a violation of fair use, which enables copyrighted work
to be used without

With the advent of the Internet, Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in
1998 to address the obligations imposed by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
Treaty. Owners of copyright were concerned that their works would be pirated online, and the
existing legal systems in place at the time were insufficient to protect individuals and the industry as
a whole. The DMCA was passed in 1998 with the intention of stopping copyright infringers from
circumventing anti–piracy protections that have been built into copyrighted works. Specifically, the
"Section 1201(a)(1) prohibits the act of circumventing a technological measure used by copyright
owners to control access to their works." Although the DMCA was intended to bolster intellectual
property law, it has had a deleterious impact to the industry in the aggregate. Such laws stifle
innovation by preventing fair use, hindering assistive technologies for people with disabilities, and
encouraging suspicious practices encoded in software that could cause public harm. Instead, laws
should be "predicable, minimalist, consistent, and simple in the legal environment." To find a more
favorable balance, the DMCA needs to be revised to consider the, "potential impact of the device
bans on the ability of users to make non–infringing uses of copyrighted works... and the potential
harm of anti–circumvention to competition and innovation in the formation technology sector." 2 In
this respect, the

Music As Intellectual Property Summary
Music as intellectual property
The readings explore the concept of music as intellectual property and delve into the many issues
that consequently arise in the practice of "musical borrowing or quoting, digital sampling and the
Digital rights management control over "netizens".
Mc Leod introduces the issue of musical sampling as a copyright infringement with the example of
Danger mouse and his tribute to The Beatles and Jay–Z in his Grey Album. As fans were warned to
"cease and desist" the author discusses cyber civil disobedience by providing a brief intro to
musique concrete as a pioneer of later cutting edge music as Danger mouse.
Mc leod describes Danger mouse use of preexisting music as sampled reinterpretation.
"Under the current copyright ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
By providing several musical examples ranging from Sinead O Connor to Lansky, he presents the
argument of digital samples as an art form where unlike musical quotations, a performance is what
is being "borrowed" resulting in a metamorphosis of the sample as it is presented in a new theme.
"Yet isn't there something fundamentally different between such traditional acts of borrowing and
digital sampling? It is sometimes said that while a quotation is simply a representation of another
piece, a sampled passage of music is that music. But that depends on what the meaning of "is" is".
In the above statement, Katz brings us back the quintessential debate on what constitutes music, the
score, the sounds, recording, etc. By presenting musical example of centuries of musical quotations
such as L'homme arme mass or Dies Irae, he underlines the differences between a musical quotation
and sampling
By breaking down Notjustmoreidlechatter by Lansky he challenges our perception on where
interpretation lies in a composition. Lansky's piece, he argues, makes the listener an active
interpreter since lanky has cut out the performer.

What Is Copyright Regime?
What is copyright regime?
Before this paper address what a copyright regime is, one need to know what copyright is;
Copyrights implies you claim the rights to your work. It 's your decision whether somebody can
make duplicates of it, presentation it for individuals to see, distribute it, or perform it in a show.
Nobody can do any of those things without your consent. Copyright in its literal meaning is a legal
term, which the authors, creators or makers claim over their scholarly and imaginative exertion.
Creations and works such as original and genuine books, licenced digital music, depictions, model,
and movies. Moreover, PC programmes, databases, commercials, maps, and specialised drawings
are all included under the definition of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Contingent upon the pertinent right, the kind of utilisation and the division, licences are frequently
allowed specifically by the right holder or aggregate administration associations. The EU has as of
late embraced enactment to enhance the working of aggregate administration organizations
including through encouraging the procurement of multi–regional licences. (European Commission,
2015)
For the sake of an argument, there exists no such thing as universal copyright law. If it 's the case,
then its complexities and complications would be baseless. Rather, there is an entire mixture of
worldwide bargains, combinations, and traditions. For all these universal arrangements and
traditions among different nations, there would be no value to get for copyright holders to authorise
their rights.
In light of the ascent of worldwide trade and the expanding significance of the intellectual property,
most countries in a global context have gone into a progression of bargains, combinations and
traditions. All those self–starters, this paper, will be connecting to a rundown of nations and the
different copyright bargains/traditions they have gone into. For example, the U.S. has legitimised
into the accompanying arrangements on various grounds such as the Berne Union, the Paris
modification of the Berne bargain, the UCC and its Paris correction, NAFTA, the WIPO Copyright
Treaty, and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, and so forth. These arrangements
regularly have

A & M Records Vs. Napster
A&M Records v. Napster is a landmark case in which the application of intellectual property laws
has forever impacted contemporary culture with regards to digital works. The legal issues and
applicable laws presented in the instant case resulted in a holding, which set forth a precedent that
has influence the mode and means of digital works distribution. The outcome of Napster affects both
businesses and individuals. Napster, a free online file sharing network, allowed peers to share digital
files directly with each other by way of connections through its software and system. The no cost
peer–to–peer sharing gained popularity, particularly with trendy music. A&M Records took notice
of the free digital music downloads and brought suit against Napster for direct, contributory, and
vicarious copyright infringements (Washington University School of Law, 2013). First, it is
important to discuss the direct, contributory and vicarious infringement claims against Napster.
Direct copyright infringement claims are based on a breach of a copyright owners' exclusive rights
to the copyrighted work(s). A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004, 1013 (9th Cir.
2001). Napster was found liable for this because the users used its platform to upload and download
copyrighted music, thus infringing on two exclusive rights: reproduction and distribution. Id at
1014. Contributory copyright infringement claims are based on secondary infringers who have
either actual or

In today's society, it seems as if the internet has become a hot topic for politicians, and issues such
as piracy, censorship, and privacy appears in the mainstream media. Whether it's the US Digital
Millennium Copyright Act informing you that some search results have been removed, news of
foreign governments controlling what their citizens can and can't view, or Apple and other
corporations refusing to meet the demands of the FBI, the internet, and government dealings are
closely intertwined. American media gives coverage to many of these stories but there a lot of bills,
acts, laws etc. get no attention. Not only is this lack of information deceptive, but it is also
dangerous for internet users. Bills such as SOPA and PIPA from 2011, ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This is best shown in their organization of the largest online protest in history. In order to strike
SOPA and PIPA they collaborated with companies such as Wikipedia, Google, and Mozilla to stage
a blackout to raise awareness of the antipiracy bills. Had they not succeeded, "SOPA would also
allow rights holders to force payment processors to cut off payments and advertising networks to cut
ties with a [blacklisted] site simply by sending a notice." (EFF, 2016) As other threats against the
internet have surfaced, FFTF has researched the topics and spread the information to the public. One
way they do this is by sending out regular emails that allow subscribers to stay informed. On March
3rd, 2016, the campaign director Evan sent out an email that detailed the debate between Apple and
the FBI over privacy and security (see page 4). Throughout the email, he talked about what he saw
at a congressional hearing on the topic. He expressed how encouraged he was that members from
both the Republican and Democrat parties asked hard questions and overall were not convinced of
the FBI's arguments. Despite this small victory, Evan wrote that the reader would need to continue
the momentum to ensure a complete victory against the FBI's threat to privacy. FFTF hopes to
launch a large educational

Case Study 10.4 Google and Youtube Together Essay
1. In your view and experience on YouTube, will typical YouTube viewers accept advertising while
watching the videos?
As a YouTube user, advertising is a pain and I try to avoid it whenever possible, but it could be
much worse and is generally non–intrusive as possible. Some videos provide a flash overlay at the
bottom of the video that displays an advertisement similar to the Google ad words advertisements
that appear when using Google for searching. This flash overlay can even be closed as soon as it
appears. The advertisement does not hinder the viewer from being able to watch their video
immediately. The text in the case study mentions how most viewers are dissatisfied with having to
watch an advertisement before viewing the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act requires the owners of content to notify websites when their
copyrights are infringed. This works for YouTube because the responsibility lies with the copyright
owners to police the site and notify them when they see their material posted, but this places extra
burden with those copyright holders. But if YouTube has to scan the vast numbers of videos
uploaded every minute on its site, the concept of YouTube would not work because users expect
their videos to be posted immediately.
3. Assume you were a manufacturer of sporting goods, and wanted to use YouTube videos as a
marketing tool to establish your brand. What concerns would you have about using YouTube?
Video advertisements have a response rate of 0.4%, which is still greater than regular web
advertisements such as banner ads, but is not an impressive number if I were a sporting goods
manufacturer looking to use YouTube video ads as a major part of my advertising budget. I can
expect that a large portion of the viewing audience would skip or block out my advertisement. The
return on investment is potentially very small. Another concern I would have would be copyright
issues, especially since 25% of the videos on YouTube contain copyrighted material and make up
possibly more than half of the total views. There could be potential risks of lawsuits from
advertisements appearing on videos which contain

Is It Creates A Culture?
Firstly, it creates a culture that is knowledgeable and more aware of what is available in the market.
A survey conducted in 2014 revealed that a third of Australians download illegally, and more than
half does so due to lack of access. They have tried to obtain them legally, but the movies weren't
available in Australia (McNab, 2015). Similarly, paid subscription movie providers such as Netflix
or Foxtel doesn't show latest shows, as mentioned by Popcorn time's spokes person, "A lot of the
project is about showing... other companies like Netflix that having the content that's currently on
air–the new stuff, not last season–that's what drives people to watch. It's a way of showing the media
that you can do better." (McDuling, 2015). ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
As mentioned by Mason "We live in a new world where things we used to pay for, such as music,
movies, and newspapers, are now available for free." (Mason, 2008). Because Popcorn time allows
users to have access to latest movies easily and for free, they no longer feel the need to buy them.
Especially when there are growing numbers of users of torrenting, it creates a mindset for the
younger generations to forget the value of movies, hence creating a culture where media are
assumed to be accessible for free. This culture is further strengthened by the fact that movies are too
expensive to purchase. Both arguments can be proven from a survey conducted on 2010. According
to the result, it is the under 20's and over 61 years old who are less willing to pay for legal content.
Furthermore, out of the 5902 respondents who download illegally, 43.5% sated the reason is because
going to the cinema is too expensive, and 42.4% reveal that it is because of the convenience
(Ramadge, 2010). Another more recent article mentioned that digital products are 50% more
expensive in Australia, due to the Australia tax, and the issue of piracy cannot be addressed unless
contents are easily accessible and reasonably priced (Law, 2014). Therefore, it can be argued that
because movie prices are expensive, most consumers are reluctant to pay and choose torrenting or
applications such as Popcorn time to get movies. Because of this, overtime this practice changed

Issues of Digital Rights Management (DRM) in India
On purchasing an audio– book of George Orwell's classic, "1984" from iTunes, the author was faced
with a peculiar problem– the audio– book had a weird mb4 format, playable only on Apple products
and the conversion to mp3 was impossible because the file was well, encrypted. So, when section
65A of the Indian Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 was notified , a legal analysis seemed to be
pertinent– for this provision, introducing Digital Rights Management (DRM) in India, would indeed
have a palpable effect on almost all Indian consumers of digital media. Section 65A of the Indian
Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 provides legal protection to technological protection measures
(or 'TPM' e.g. digital locks, encryption), such that the circumvention of such TPM is prohibited,
while tools or devices aiding circumvention may be permitted for the purpose of fair use. Such use
of TPM for the purpose of access control is classified as DRM and can take many forms– limiting
number of installations and plays , limiting content to certain file types , limiting content to be
played on particular software etc. We first analyze this provision in comparison with similar US and
EU provisions and try to understand whether it is a favourable addition to Indian IP law, especially
in the context of its political– economic background. We then try and analyze the problems with the
provision, especially through the lens of an economic analysis as well as from a consumer point of
view. Since, DRM is

The Case Of Metallica V Napster
Copyright Stance With over three billion people in the world utilizing the internet there is great
danger for copyright infringement to occur (Internet Live Stats). Copyright law protects the creator
of an original piece of work exclusive rights to the work. Many people who use the internet are
sharing files that do not belong to them and are guilty of copyright infringement. Copyright law
needs to be tightened up in the digital space to protect the creator of their unique work. In the case
of Metallica v Napster (2000), Metallica filed suit against Napster for infringing upon their
ownership of their unique music. "The suit claims that Napster 'devised and distributed software
whose sole purpose is to permit Napster to profit by abetting and encouraging' piracy" (Doan, 2000).
The music was original and copyrighted by Metallica. The Napster song downloads were being done
without their consent or royalties paid. The court ruled in favor of Metallica and eventaully shutting
down Napster for Copyright infringement. With technology so readily available there are many
people and companies who have participated in similar illegal activities. The original copyright law
did not take into consideration the digital area. By implementing Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(DMCA) it has tightened up the protection of things online and in the digital arena.
"The DMCA makes it illegal to circumvent digital rights management technology or to 'import, offer
to the public, provide or

Code Of Best Practices: The Digital Millennium Copyright...
A lot has happened in the world of information since 1976. The digital age has had a big impact on
our interpretation of fair use. It used to be that illegal copies of digital material were easy to spot
because they were of obvious poor quality compared to the original. Advances in technology,
however, have made it possible to easily create copies that are just as high quality as the original.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 put up a few barriers to fair use. This legislation
made it illegal to destroy or bypass any copyright protection mechanism on a digital work even on a
legally purchased copy. For educators, this means that even if the use is fair, copying these files or
videos is restricted.
Slide 6 The TEACH Act of 2002 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
One myth is that copyright campaigns that are widely available to schools are a good source of
copyright information. In actuality, these programs with characters like Copyright Captain,
Copyright Kids, and Donny the Downloader are usually created by publishing companies who have
a biased interest in preventing many fair uses of their materials. These campaigns often unfairly
criminalize many fair use applications. Another myth is that fair use rules are rigid. This is far from
the truth. Fair use is very flexible. American Library Association copyright expert, Carrie Russell,
says that you may never know if your decision that a use was fair was right. The only way to know
for sure is if a court decides. You just have to use the guidelines and trust your best judgment.
Another myth is that the risk to educators in copyright issues is high. Although criminal copyright
conviction is a felony it just doesn't happen. Because fair use is vague there is a lot of wiggle room
in its interpretation. One last myth is that school copyright policies are good references for
determining if a use is fair. These policies are usually written by district lawyers who are worried
about worst case liability and are overly restrictive as a

Essay about The Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Signed into law by President Clinton on October 28, 1998, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(DMCA) "was the foundation of an effort by Congress to implement United States treaty obligations
and to move the nation's copyright law into the digital age." ("Executive Summary DMCA Report")
While this seems a valid description of the law, perhaps a more accurate interpretation lies in the
following statement: "The DMCA is a piece of legislation rushed through Congress by the
entertainment industry lobbyists to protect its monopoly on commercially–developed digital content,
cartels, price–fixing, and to maintain its status quo as the single entity that can direct what should be
'popular' or 'used' by ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
For example, the DMCA is often used by copyright holders "to successfully fight Napster–like
services and protect their anticopying technology". (Thibodeau 41) While it may seem logical that
copyright holders want to protect their technology and interests, the truth is that the law "impinges
on the right of consumers to copy content." (Thibodeau 41) Obviously there is a conflict of interests
at issue and a consensus is needed to protect both consumers as well as copyright holders. However,
violating the founding principles of the nation, and citizen's rights to freedom of speech is not the
answer.
Further, in court rulings related to the DMCA, "the courts have imposed liability and enjoined
conduct for what in other contexts would be considered fair use or freedom of the press. In addition,
the DMCA has been used to stifle academic research, and to arrest and indict a Russian programmer
who had come to the United States to present a paper at a conference. These cases and actions raise
questions as to whether Congress has changed the established rules, rather than just modernizing
them, for the digital era." (Ottaviani C1) This conduct demonstrates the great abuse of the DMCA in
relation to the First Amendment; freedom of speech is the most important freedom granted to United
States citizens and it must be protected.
"Before the DMCA was enacted, manufacturers of devices that permitted one to copy works
generally considered themselves protected by the fair use

Internet Legislation And The Loss Of American Freedom
Internet Legislation and the Loss of American Freedom SOPA, PIPA, and CISPA: though different,
these bills were all presented with a similar goal in mind. These bills were intended to stop the
digital copyright infringement of American intellectual properties, mainly in foreign countries, but
the overly vague wording in the bills made it hard to decipher their real intentions (Yu). For a
multitude of reasons, these bills were staunchly protested not only by American citizens, but they
also received protest from numerous international groups (York). Though some may argue that
SOPA, PIPA, or CISPA may have had some value, they did not have the intended result of ending
digital theft, but rather invigorated a retaliating movement. The main ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Following this, all payment providers, such as PayPal, would be forced to block payments to the
website. Finally, they would order ad services to stop placing their ads on the prosecuted website
(Summary). The aforementioned companies were required to respond and take these actions within
five days of being notified of the website's malicious activity. If they failed to do so, the copyright
holder would take these companies to court on accusations of disregarding the claims of copyright
infringement (Summary). The strangest part about all of this is that the bill would take no action
directly against the accused website, but would have only cut off access to it (Summary). This marks
a primary distinction between PIPA and SOPA, which are often presented as equivalent bills. For
one, PIPA does not force search engines to remove a website accused of hosting copyrighted content
from their indexes, which is one of the most debated points of SOPA. It also has provisions that
require greater court intervention, however it does not contain any sort of penalty for a copyright
holder who goes after an innocent site, where as SOPA has provisions in place for such an
occurrence (Couts).
These bills were met with a massive backlash when they were first announced. They were protested
in New York, Seattle, San Francisco, and many other major cities. On the eighteenth of January
2012 over one hundred and fifteen thousand

What Is The Digital Millennium Copyright Act?
I was not that long ago when a friend wanted to borrow a book all that needed to happen was to go
inside and locate the physical book and hand it to them. Once the book was loaned out, you no
longer had possession and could not read the book until it was returned. No special software or
devices were needed to enjoy sharing and reading a book owned by a friend or associate. These
books were still covered by copyright protection, but sharing your favorite author was easy and fun.
It was not long after computers became more mainstream that books and other media could be found
digitally produced by the author, creator or publisher. With this advancement came the ability to
share a book or other media with a friend while retaining the original ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
What if the content server is not available? Temporary outages are common in the IT world, but
what if the content server was permanently gone and no longer supported. Think about 8 tracks and
cassette tapes. It will not be long, if not already, where mainstream individual will not be able to
play the content on that old format. There is also privacy concerns with a proprietary system. We do
not know what information is really sent to Adobe.There is also a price concern. Part of the cost of
digital media lies in the price of the DRM protection,which can be expensive especially for smaller
artists or production companies. There are plenty of positive and negatives to be found, so where
does this leave Adobe in the DMR space for the future?
The trend for DRM can be seen with a recent ruling by W3C to standardize DRM content on the
web. Though this ruling is far from perfect, and might even be worse than the current version, it
does create a standard (Kastrenakes, 2017) . As with most first version standards, there is a way to
go in making it work for most or all situations, but the trend is clear. Once a standard is created,
nobody really owns it, so companies including open source versions are free to enter the market and
produce a affordable competing product that everyone can use.
DRM software is in place to protect the artist, writer and

How Does The Ethics Violate The Dmca Code Of Ethics

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Beth Johnson

More from Beth Johnson (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

How Does The Ethics Violate The Dmca Code Of Ethics