The
internet, where everyone is an expert yet everyone is a liar. Considering the
number of online communities that allow both user driven production and
consumption it has become very difficult to identify truly original content. We
would like to believe that the internet is a place to go where information and
ideas can be shared freely across world. In my utopian society the internet
would be a place with absolutely no government regulations could be enforced. However this is not the case, as the internet
has become an increasingly more relevant part of society we have also seen the
agencies begin to regulate the content on the internet. By agencies I am referring
to agencies other than the one that actually runs the website. I believe that
if a person or company operates a website or application using the internet it
is the responsibility of that and only that website to regulate the content displayed
on their website.
The most
historical moment of a government intervention on the internet started in the
early 2000’s when Napster an audio file sharing website named in a lawsuit by
major bands and record label for “pirating” songs. I think that this is the most
commonly used example of why and how the discussion of copyright laws on the
internet began. The topic became quite controversial because there were
millions of users around the world sharing files online using Napster, the
government could not arrest these people for copyright law and so began the
blurring of the lines of copyright laws on the internet.
Ideally, we
want the ability to express our ideas, interest, and thoughts on the internet
without having to be concerned with breaking laws. However it would be unfair
to steal other work and pass it off as your own. The question we are faced as a
society now is, how can an online community create a freely accessible culture with
the current restriction of copyright laws? Jenkins says, “Ultimately, our media future could depend on the
kind of uneasy truce that gets brokered between commercial media and collective
intelligence.” (Jenkins)
There is no
correct answer to this question. The internet is too enormously large to create
any specific laws to govern the entirety of the internet. It’s the same as
trying to impose the laws from ancient Greece to our society today, it is just
not viable. The internet can be used by so many for so many different purposes “Users post television clips almost as soon (as) they have been broadcast, which allows viewers who
missed a politician’s faux pas or bits of incisive satire to see the relevant
material in time to participate in water cooler conversations.” (Hilderbrand
p.49) Posting television clips
could be considered a copyright infringement however society can benfits from
being able to get news from different sources on the internet. At the same time
the evolution of dance YouTube clip is “the most viewed clip in YouTube
history” (Hilderbrand p.51) violates
all kinds of copyright laws and it was produced just for fun.
I guess what
I’m trying to convey is that because of the vastness that is the internet, the
different purposes for using the internet trying to regulate copyright laws on
the internet is simply of waste of time and resources that could be used
elsewhere. It can be said that to regulate and overcome copyright laws a
website or person must site where the information comes from. This would help
the maker of the original content receive recognition for their efforts. In the
end it is a battle that will never be won by either side at least now and in
the near future.
No comments:
Post a Comment