Introduction
Fish Bone Diagram – Intellectual Property
COPY RIGHTS “Applies Liability to Copyright Infringement with the invention of iTunes and iPod”
Protection of intellectual property (IP) is devised into four parts: copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets and patents. Even though all four parts share a common goal, each follow its own special sets of rules and requirements. The part of this paper, specifically concentrated on the copyrights infringement. Although copyright infringement Acts are established and strictly enforced by the federal government, many companies still figure out a way to go around them. One of the biggest controversies of the 21st century is discussed in a case study in this paper “The Copyright Crusher: How Apple’s iTunes is a vehicle designed for copyright infringement and Apple’s legal liability from its creation”. [2] The paper describes the fundamental issues of copyright protections, the way iTunes enable the infringement of the rights, and the legal liability of Apple. The paper explicitly focuses on:
Direct infringement:
• Violation of at least one exclusive right granted to copyright holder.
• The derivation of the original work.
• How the creation of iTunes and its operation infringe on rights protected by the Copyright Act.
• Potential defenses.
• Potential liability from the creation of iTunes.
Copyright protects almost all works of creative expression “fixed in a tangible medium of expression” but it
Is important for anyone who has created any intellectual property to protect it. In the music industry, in order for someone to protect their work, they must obtain a copyright. Music has been around before anyone could obtain a copyright and when the invention of the computer came along it made it easier for someone to steal another artist's intellectual property with the help of the internet. This paper will cover what events have taken a big role in copyright protection for artist, the consequences if someone was to break the rules of a copyright which is called copyright infringement, and how will a copyright hold in the future. Were copyrights enacted without the thought of life changing technology, and how can some music companies
Nowadays, the world of music has become one of the favorite ways to enjoy daily activities with people. Moreover, the technology provides an opportunity to people to learn how to produce music. However, here comes a serious problem with the convenience of the easy accessibility to get the music resources, it caused the problems of indiscriminate use and pirated copyright.
Traditional legal principles and processes are constantly challenged by the need to keep pace with copyright issues in particular piracy. The Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2015
The second approach to copyright is the democratic approach. All works of art are ideas built on a foundation of other ideas. The democratic approach advocates that intellectual property belongs to the society and should be available for the general good of the public. If the particular usage is intended to derive financial benefit or any other business-related benefits, it is considered inappropriate usage. If the utilization of factual work were more usable than the use of someone’s creative work, then that would not be fair use. There is no specified edge to the amount of quoted work that can be called “fair use.” The courts exercise common sense to determine if it was too much. If the utilization of the material created market or stirred a competition, and if the fair use diminishes demand for the original product, it is not considered as appropriate use (Crews, 1993).
The purpose of the copyright system has always been to promote creativity in society and protect the creators’ interests. In applying copyright laws to any creation, three basic guidelines apply. First is the fair return for a creators labor, second is “Fair Use” of the creators’ labor and finally the Progress of Science and useful Arts to further the public good. The application of these three guidelines in litigation for A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, found that the rights of reproduction, and distribution had been violated, in effect upholding the copyrights of nineteen different music companies represented under A&M Records name, this ruling had protected the music industries interests. However it would seem that the publishing industry would not be so lucky, litigation in Authors’ Guild vs. Google ruled that Google’s actions constituted fair use. Under these two scenarios’ the copyright laws’ have, effectively, protected the rights of music artists’, protected the public’s right to “fair use” and sparked new opportunities for creative growth. However, lawmakers continue to struggle to define copyright boundaries between the public’s right of use and the creators right to profit from their efforts.
Along with the development of a file format (MP3) to store digital audio recordings, came one of the new millennium’s most continuous debates – peer-to-peer piracy – file sharing. Internet companies such as Napster and Grokster became involved in notable legal cases in regards to copyright laws in cyberspace. These two cases are similar in nature, yet decidedly different. In order to understand the differences and similarities, one should have an understanding of each case as well as the court’s ruling.
We all know that downloading pirated music and films is illegal, but what exactly is it? The term piracy refers to the copying and selling of music, films and other media illegally; in other words you are copying and selling copyrighted media without the permission of the original owner (NiDirect, n.d.). With the massive growth of the internet and its ability to store and capture vast amounts of data, we have become much more reliable on information systems in all aspects of life, but it does not come without the risk of information technology being used unethically. With the number of IT breakthroughs in recent years “the importance of ethics and human values has been underemphasised” often resulting in various consequences. Not surprisingly one of the many public concerns about the ethical use of IT is that “millions of people have downloaded music and movies at no charge and in apparent violation of copyright laws at tremendous expense to the owners of those copyrights” (Reynolds, Ethics in Information Technology, 2015). This essay covers the ethical issues of downloading pirated music and films and the impact it has on music corporations and recording and film companies.
Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) is one of the world leaders in the research, development, marketing, sales and service of personal digital music & video devices, in addition to personal computers globally. Its' innovative music and digital content delivery service, iTunes, has sold over 1 billion songs to date. As of the close of their latest fiscal year the company generated $156B in Sales and generated a Gross Profit of $68B earning a Net Income of $41B (Apple Investor Relations, 2013). The intent of this analysis is to evaluate Apple's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) and provide an analysis of each. The cause, impact and recommendations for each specific strength, weakness, opportunity and threat are provided along with an action plan of how to maximize strengths and opportunities and mitigate the effects of weaknesses and threats. The Apple brand is among the most valuable in the world and its ability to innovate with successive product generations unmatched, yet this has led to a high dependence on its iPhone and iPad platforms, to the exclusion of entirely new businesses. The Apple iTunes platform and ecosystem delivers 30% of all profits and a significant portion of overall revenue, making this single business a stabilizing force in their strategic product and services roadmap (Apple Investor Relations, 2013). Despite these challenges however Apple continues to attain
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.
Introduction: Setting the trend for the future, the distribution and consumption of recorded music transformed dramatically with the launching of Apple’s iTunes in 2001. The proliferation of online music subscription services and other music sharing services exerted a great pressure on the conventional music distribution business model. Combined with this transformation, piracy of digital music had a profound impact on the whole industry. These worsening conditions in the market place for recorded music forced both established and upcoming new artists to experiment with new ways of selling their music.
Producers of musical content cannot undo the adverse effects that piracy has had on the industry. Because of the internet and the way individuals have manipulated it to obtain music, many people are unwilling to change their habits. Here lies the issue between the producer and the consumer. Acts like the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) work against the incentive of many consumers by telling them that they cannot do what maximizes their utility. Producers are thus working against the likings of the consumer. This is wrong.
Identify and discuss these copyright challenges in the modern digital economy using examples from case law.
The rise of the Internet era opened the whole new market for traditional media full of opportunities as well as threats. Online piracy being one of them because the music and film industry loses £5.4bn in a year and if it was reduced by 10% it could have created up to 13 thousand jobs in the UK. There are various attempts taken to fight with online piracy; a case study of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement will be considered as well as other legislations attempting to regulate copyrights in the Internet. This
This paper analyzes the conflicts between the need of technology for creativity and innovation versus the legal aspect of copyright.
Companies like Apple, have decided that it is best to get in with the downloading business. However, an end to the illegal downloading conflict remains to be realized. The RIAA and associated artists continue to wage war against illegal downloaders while computer savvy audiences persist in sharing music files online every day. While it is undoubtedly true that downloading music is a crime, it remains to be proven that it is wrong. Without establishing this principle, most downloader's are likely to continue the activity. Even with new, inexpensive and available means of downloading files, they can still be shared for free online. The rift must be repaired between music lovers who feel that they have been taken advantage of in the past and recording companies and artists who worry about their future livelihood.