| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="SecondPaper" |
|---|
The Stop Online Piracy Act: the blindness continues
-- By DiegodelaPuente - 15 Nov 2011 | |
<
< | The Unfortunate Stop Online Piracy Act's discussion | >
> | The Futile Stop Online Piracy Act's discussion | | | | |
<
< | Unfortunately, the U.S. Congress’ actual discussion about the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), does not contribute to the Net development; on the contrary, it distracts the attention on real matters: copyright is no longer needed under the Net’s conception. In sum, SOPA tries to expand the U.S. Department of Justice and copyright holders’ power allowing seeking court orders against websites outside U.S. jurisdiction accused of infringing on copyrights, or of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. As Representative Lamar Smith, one of the chief sponsors of the bill, said, SOPA is need because rogue websites are stealing and selling American innovations. Moreover, even SOPA’s most important detractors, Google, Facebook, AOL and Twitter, are only talking about Internet censorship or a chilling effect on speech, rather than proposing a change from the actual copyright framework in accordance of the new technological trends. | >
> | Unfortunately, the U.S. Congress’ actual discussion about the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), does not contribute to the Net growth and the society’ development; on the contrary, it distracts the public attention on real matters: copyright is no longer needed under the Net’s conception. In sum, SOPA tries to expand the U.S. Department of Justice and copyright holders’ power allowing seeking court orders against websites outside U.S. jurisdiction accused of infringing on copyrights, or of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. As Representative Lamar Smith, one of the chief sponsors of the bill, said, SOPA is needed because rogue websites are “stealing and selling American innovations”. Moreover, even SOPA’s most important detractors, Google, Facebook, AOL and Twitter, are only talking about Internet censorship or a chilling effect on speech, rather than proposing a radical change from the actual copyright framework in accordance of the new technological trends, which is being proposed by many scholars, such as James Allsworth (Harvard Business School), Kevin Kelly (Wired Magazine), Fred Wilson (Union Square Ventures) or Mike Masnick (Techdirt). | | | | | | - SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) debate: Why are Google and Facebook against it? (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/sopa-stop-online-piracy-act-debate-why-are-google-and-facebook-against-it/2011/11/17/gIQAvLubVN_story.html)
The intellectual property market | |
<
< | | | | | |
<
< | SOPA’s proponents, mainly, the Motion Picture Association of America, Recording Industry Association of America, Business Software Alliance and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, say the bill will protect intellectual property market, including the resultant revenue and jobs; however, it is really protecting the earnings of the content industries monopolies. It seems that once again, as in the wireless telecommunications industry, the Law, in this case the copyright law, is the last to take notice of the changes that are taking place in the real world, because it is outdated and lacks of effectiveness in the Net. | | | | |
<
< | For instance, discussing the music industry, SOPA is supposed to protect singers’ intellectual property, enabling them to pursue a profit. Some journalist, such as Dr. Robert Levine (former Billboard executive editor), thinks that the best way to save artists’ jobs is to strengthen copyright laws, by the way also opposing to the idea of a free an open Internet. I disagree with that statement and that opinion current opinion and consider that the actual copyright policy should change. | >
> | SOPA’s proponents, mainly, the Motion Picture Association of America, Recording Industry Association of America, Business Software Alliance and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, say the bill will protect intellectual property market, including the resultant revenue and jobs; however, it is really protecting and preserving the earnings of the content industries monopolies. Once again, as in the wireless telecommunications industry, the Law, in this case Copyright Law, is outdated and lacks of effectiveness, because it does not consider the social changes that advanced technology is generating. For instance, regarding the music industry, SOPA is supposed to protect singers’ intellectual property, enabling them to pursue a profit. Some journalist in SOPA’s favor, such as Dr. Robert Levine (former Billboard executive editor), thinks that the best way to save artists’ jobs is to strengthen copyright laws, by the way also opposing to the idea of a free an open Internet. I disagree with that statement and that opinion current, and consider that the actual copyright policy should change, since there can be incentives and artists can maintain or even improve their jobs quality in a share XXX.
In the particular case of the content industries (film, television, books, music and others), there should be an economical model modification. Ownership idea must be change for access, sharing and selling added value services. The market will identify the right point to pay money to information providers, when they see a real value. In this concern, in 2006 Fred Wilson propose the freemium business model, that is a combination of free and premium, in short words, free gets you to the place where you can get paid. Additionally, Kevin Kelly, other scholar from XXXX, established that in this new model, the idea is not to sell copies, because they must be available to everyone and provide some alternatives to allow money earnings to artists and the industry: immediacy, personalization, authenticity (quality), attention, interpretation, accessibility, embodiment, and findability. Moreover, in 2005 Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine, two economists at Washington University, published a book, Against Intellectual Monopoly, where they described that the current patent/copyright system discourages and prevents inventions from entering the marketplace. | | | | |
<
< | Free media content | >
> | Freemium
- Fred Wilson, My Favorite Business Model (March 23, 2006) (http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2006/03/my_favorite_bus.html)
- Fred Wilson, Freemium and Freeconomics (July 4, 2009) (http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/07/freemium-and-freeconomics.html) | | | - Does culture really want to be free? (November 1, 2011) (http://www.salon.com/2011/11/01/does_culture_really_want_to_be_free/singleton) | | | - Gerd Leonhard, Free & Freemium Business Models (June 2011) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uOsLgTMGqc) | |
>
> | - Fred Wilson, Freemium and Freeconomics (July 4, 2009) (http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/07/freemium-and-freeconomics.html)
- Fred Wilson, My Favorite Business Model (March 23, 2006) (http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2006/03/my_favorite_bus.html) | | |
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable.
To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines: |
|