jsmitche Ð
J0780528
UCF SEECS:
Information Technology
Intellectual property ranges from books, articles, plays, and works of art to music, movies, games, and software. Patent and copyright laws that define the owners and creators rights to intellectual property protect all of these things. While most intellectual property can be broken down into some fundamentals, such as typed words on paper or digital ones and zeros stored on a hard drive or other media, the value comes from the ideas, creativity, skills, research, and labor that goes into producing it. Development, design, and creation can take considerable resource, effort and expense. The cost to copy such works can be minimal and if it were legally possible to do so the incentive for generating it would be lost. The exponential growth of today's Internet and the continuous evolution of data communications technology are making it increasingly simple to exchange intellectual property online. Property rights not only protect the physical property itself but also the rights to use it, rights to prevent others from using it, and the right to set the price for the property (Base, pg. 235). Without these protections society would lose some of the enthusiasm for producing these valuable and creative works.
The debate over freedom of information and an individual's ability to share this information at will cannot be ethically applied to intellectual property. The key issue to understand is that it is the subtle creative properties of the work that are protected and not the physical form that it takes. When someone purchases software or music, they are purchasing the physical data and form that it takes or license to use the program or data. The purchase does not include the creative properties of the work and especially not the right to copy any of it for a profit. The debate still rages on and with the expansion of technology new controversies are being created. In the past technology, such as the photocopier, has had similar effects but to a lesser degree. The new technologies and especially the Internet and peer-to-peer connections are making it cheaper and easier to "pirate" intellectual property.
Music
Piracy:
It seems that many people do not view this kind of copying and especially file sharing of copyrighted material as something that is morally or ethically off limits. Where music is concerned it has become so simple to search for, find, and download an MP3 file that even children are engaging in this activity. The important thing to address here is that fact that just because it is simple to do does not make it right. Ben Gutierrez of Capitalism Magazine states:
This has been viewed as a
gray issue for most of the people... It is not. The difference between stealing
a CD from a music store and copying digital information that is copyrighted is
a matter of degree. Both acts are acts of theft. To say that one is better than
the other is like saying, 'Stealing a car radio is better than stealing the
entire car.' Both are wrong.
With this in mind it is easy to understand that digital copies of material such as music is no different than music on a CD, and it is as much an infringement of copyright to burn a CD as it is to transfer an MP3 from someone over the Internet to your computer. For some people who hold a Utilitarian view this may be difficult to agree with. They may feel that whatever encourages happiness is ethical (Benech and Haugey). Music can be a great source of enjoyment and happiness for people and therefore according to the Utilitarian view piracy is acceptable. While this may be an extreme example the overall idea is still very evident among many people who participate in file sharing online. It is this attitude and the result of people acting on it that has sparked such an extreme response from the Recording Industry Association of America, artists, and record labels.
Response and Prevention in
the Recording Industry:
Both
the music recording industry and the software development industry have
suffered losses recently due to the advent of peer-to-peer file sharing. In response to these losses industry
leaders have begun implementing prevention techniques as well as lobbying for
political action. From a
governmental standpoint it is important to carefully draft laws that will
protect the rights of intellectual property creators while at the same time not
hindering technological innovation (Gattuso and Michel).
From
the music recording industry has come such prevention techniques as
advertisements that feature musical artists speaking out against music
piracy. While this type of
response may sever to educate the general public most companies feel that more
active measures are necessary. One
of the more recent victories for the music industry has been the Òself-helpÓ
laws that enable them to actively attempt to prevent, or make it more
difficult, for users to obtain pirated copies of music. Two examples of this would be recording
companies filling the file sharing networks with bogus files and actually
joining the networks and downloading the files in question at a very low speed
essentially drastically increasing the time it takes for an illegitimate party
to download the file (Gattuso and Michel). Techniques such as these are meant to
frustrate and discourage people from attempting to download illegal copies of
MP3s. The record company Epic
Records came up with a simple solution to a problem related to unreleased music
making it onto the peer-to-peer networks.
Instead of sending CDs in regular cases to reviewers of new unreleased
albums and singles they sent portable CD players glued shut. They also glued the headphones into the
player all in order to prevent the prerelease of their music (Nelson).
More
recently in 2003 the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) engaged
in a legal battle that included lawsuits and warnings sent to many individuals
who were identified as participating in illegal file sharing of music. Such actions by the RIAA have proven to
be effective in discouraging users from downloading copyrighted music. While these actions have seen results
for the recording industry they have also raised issues related to privacy of
individuals, particularly where the RIAA has attempted to make Internet service
providers release identification information about their customers (Carlos).
Beyond
actually prosecuting individuals the recording industry has focused on the
education of the general public.
More specifically they have begun to work closely with colleges and
universities to impose penalties on students as well as educate them on the
subject of intellectual property.
Students have been required to participate in online information
sessions as well as lectures and even speeches during orientation and
registration. While most
educational organizations are not willing to restrict studentÕs access to
networks and the ability to participate in the pirating of music, many have
implemented policies that educate and provide penalties to students who
noticeably use school resources for this activity (Dana).
The
actions taken by the recording industry are not limited to the United
States. The International
Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) is an international organization
similar to the RIAA. This group
has targeted individuals who have been involved in making thousands upon
thousands of illegal copies of music files available on the Internet in Europe
and Canada. In 2000 the Mexican
section of the IFPI arrested ten people including one of the most notorious
music pirates in Mexico. Mexico
and Latin America are noted to have around 40% of the music piracy around the
world (IFPI). This arrest was part of an evolving effort
by the Mexican government to prevent music piracy. While these actions taken by the recording industry have
served to spread awareness and even reduce music piracy Worldwide some people
believe this is only the beginning of what is a larger initiative. A director
at Harvard Law School, Jonathan Zittrain, believes that the recording industry
has plans to actually bring lawsuits against Internet service providers who
fail to enforce polices that prevent users of their networks from participating
in illegal activities (Bergstein).
Software
Piracy:
Billions of dollars of commercially developed software is downloaded and used without license every year and the numbers continue to increase as more people join the online community. Software piracy involves many different activities including "illegal copying of programs, counterfeiting and distributing software-even sharing a program with a friend" (Microsoft Piracy Basics). Software that is pirated consists of everything from utilities and word processors to games and operating systems. Almost all software programs are licensed for a single use on one system. When software is purchased the buyer becomes the licensed user of the program but not the owner of the software.
While it may be legal in most cases to create back up copies of your programs it is not legal to distribute copies even to friends and family. Regardless of the legality of the act it still occurs everywhere around the world and across the World Wide Web. People actually post files for programs of illegally copied software, known as warez, on websites and servers for others to download. Some warez even include software that has not been released to the public commercially yet. Companies have developed many different types of protection from copy-protection to registration requirements but nothing is ever completely foolproof (Webopedia). One of the answers to this problem has been shareware. Shareware actually encourages the distribution of the software to other people with the hope that they will like the software enough to pay a registration fee to the creator. Another type of software that takes it a step further is known as freeware. Freeware is exactly what it implies, it's free to download and use. The programmers go on the good faith that people will make donations for the freeware they find useful. It should be pointed out that most of the software that is either shareware or freeware are smaller less powerful programs that for the most part cannot be used in the industry to make money. Most of them are helper applications that simply add functionality to existing software or make mundane computer tasks quicker and easier.
The Software and Information Industry Association and the Business Software Alliance, the two main organizations that deal with software piracy, recently "estimated that the value of software pirated worldwide has been roughly $11-13 billion per year" (Base, pg. 249). Online it is difficult to track and penalize people for sharing copies of software. Many people justify the crime by claiming that the software is too expensive and they cannot afford to pay such a high price. What most people are not aware of is that as with any business loss is made up for through a hike in the retail prices. Another reason people are willing to engage in this activity with out regard is the fact that the companies who produce this software are very large and successful. This also applies to the music copying issue. The important thing to be conscious of is the fact that musicians, programmers, and writers lose out as well when piracy and copying is widespread and frequent.
Software Industry Response:
In 1997 congress passed the No Electronic
Theft (NET) Act which, among other things, made it officially illegal for
anyone to pirate unlicensed software over the Internet (UCLA). This act imposed penalties that could
be applied to individuals who engaged in this kind of activity. This was one of the first major steps
towards a global initiative to protect the rights of the creators and producers
of intellectual property online.
According to the U.S.
Department of Justice website, in 2000 an international group of 17
individuals were convicted of copyright infringement under this act. This group of individuals consisted of
members of what was known as ÒPirates with AttitudesÓ and several employees of
Intel Corporation. They were all
involved in the distribution of over $1 million worth of pirated software
through the use of a secret Internet server in Canada. Attorney James Conway stated "the
trial demonstrated law enforcementÕs commitment to prosecute software piracy cases
and the FBIÕs ability to successfully investigate sophisticated online
activity" (Cybercrime.gov). This case was part of the Intellectual Property
Initiative. The Intellectual
Property Initiative is a joint plan proposed by the Department of Justice, the
F.B.I. and the U.S. Customs service.
The focus of this initiative is to fight the quickly expanding problems
created by intellectual property theft. A representative of this initiative
Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder stated, "we are here to send the
message that those who steal our intellectual property will be
prosecuted. This is theft, pure and simpleÓ (Cybercrime.gov).
Prior
to these incidents in 1998 the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DCMA) was
passed. UCLAÕs Online Institute for
Cyberspace Law and Policy summarizes some of the main points of this act as
follows:
- Makes it a crime to circumvent anti-piracy
measures built into most commercial software.
- Outlaws the manufacture, sale, or distribution
of code-cracking devices used to illegally copy software.
- In general, limits Internet service providers from copyright infringement liability for simply transmitting information over the Internet.
- Service providers, however, are expected to remove material from users' web sites that appears to constitute copyright infringement.
- Requires that "webcasters" pay
licensing fees to record companies.
- States explicitly that "[n]othing in this
section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright
infringement, including fair use..."
This
act has been the basis for actions taken by the software industry as well as
the topic of much debate among members of the online community. Of course some of the major advocates
of this act were the large software corporations such as Microsoft and
Adobe. Both of these companies
have websites dedicated to educating users, providing a portal for reporting
piracy, and establishing partnerships to prevent piracy and help other
organizations remain compliant with copyright laws. Microsoft has even brought lawsuits recently against other
companies for copyright infringement (Microsoft). Adobe defines penalties on their site
that Òcan result in prison terms of up to five years, and felony charges with
fines up to US$250,000Ó (Adobe).
The
smaller companies such as Ambrosia Software, a shareware company, have
developed some pretty innovative techniques for preventing piracy of their
software. They implemented a
license code structure that contained the actual date the code was created in
the actual license code. This allowed
the program to run for up to 30 days before the user is prompted to register
the product. They then took the
registration process a step further by making the codes have an expiration
date. Every time a program is
installed the code is entered and if the code is expired the user must request
a new code. The program connects
to the automated Ambrosia server and if the user is legitimate and the code is
not a pirated one the program acquires a new valid code. If this code is not valid then a new
code is not generated and the userÕs name and Internet address are logged in
the server (fprefect).
Conclusions:
To the originators of these products, who put in their time, effort, intelligence, and creativity, the main issue is ensuring that they are suitably compensated. To the industry, corporations, and companies the issue is protecting the assets that they make investments into. The end user enjoys the use of this intellectual property whether it was acquired legally or illegally. It seems that as long as there is a way to get something for free people will do it regardless of the ethical and moral implications. At the same time there will always be people who are willing and able to pay full price for legal use of such properties. As technology and the Internet expands there will always be new and more challenging issues developing especially where intellectual property is concerned.
New digital rights management includes technologies that use encryption and authorization to restrict copying or even viewing of digital information. It can also be used to prevent distribution, printing, or even saving files. This sort of technology raises fair use issues and raises many criticisms. The major fear is that the restrictions placed on digital intellectual property will lead eventually to securing all forms of information and putting a price on it. This idea may seem beneficial and even inviting to the industries, but to consumers and proponents of education and free information itÕs a nightmare. Some other solutions for the future are widespread publication of indexing for the copyrighted material to make it easier to collect fees for that information as well as providing discounts for large amounts. On the law enforcement side it seems that highly publicized raids and cases with very large fines for violations seem to be effective in preventing large scale piracy.
The industries and government are continually battling for stronger control and harsher penalties for violation of copyrights and intellectual property. One of the major concerns has been the education of the general public and tactics that make people aware of the consequences of intellectual theft. It will take a combination of both technological advances and techniques that help prevent it as well as legislative actions that balance protection of rights with the ability to pursue innovations. These issues will always be a problem, and just as the Internet and technology are evolving so will the responses to the exploitation of these resources for criminal activity by the government and industries.
References:
Base, Sara. A Gift of Fire. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc., 2003
Gutierrez, Ben. "Music 'Sharing' and Music Piracy: End
Intellectual Theft" December 29, 2001 Ð This article explains
that stealing a CD from a store and downloading copyrighted information are
both similar crimes.
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1319
A Business Ethics Project Ð Piracy by Ryan Benech and Nick Haugey.
http://itrs.scu.edu/mcalkins/fall99/EthicsMP3/html/judgment.htm
ÒFacing the Music: The Battle Over Digital
PiracyÓ by James L. Gattuso and Norbert J. Michel. October 21, 2002.
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed102102.cfm
ÒEpic records Takes Steps to Seal Its Newest
MusicÓ by Chris Nelson.
ÒRIAA extends legal actions to fight online
music piracyÓ by Juan Carlos. December 03, 2003.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/12/03/HNriaalegal_1.html
ÒTo Fight Music Piracy, Industry Goes to
SchoolsÓ by Rebecca Dana. August 28, 2003.
ÒHuge music piracy ring cracked by
police in MexicoÓ IFPI - International Federation of the Phonographic Industry
http://www.ifpi.org/site-content/press/20000620.html
ÒMusic Industry Goes After Music Piracy
OverseasÓ by Brian Bergstein. March 30, 2004.
http://news.findlaw.com/ap_stories/high_tech/1700/3-30-2004/20040330123005_46.html
ÒThe UCLA Online Institute for Cyberspace Law
and PolicyÓ
http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/iclp/dmca1.htm
The Microsoft Anti-Piracy Website - Microsoft Piracy Alerts
http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/alert/default.asp
Adobe: Software Penalties
http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/antipiracy/penalties.html
Ambrosia Software: ÒBitwise Operator Ð The Plain Truth About
PiracyÓ by fprefect.
http://www.ambrosiasw.com/cgi-bin/ubb/newsdisplay.cgi?action=topics&number=14&article=000052