| Abstract |
Piracy
is one of the biggest problems in the United States — and indeed the
world — today. In 2001 alone, the United States lost more than 9 billion
dollars in copyright piracy. Alarming as they might be, these figures unlikely
would reveal the true extent of the damages the country suffered. In a recent
music conference, the head of the International Federation of the Phonographic
Industry (IFPI) indicated that music piracy had threatened 600,000 jobs
in the European music industry. Given the intertwining relationship between
the copyright industries and the U.S. economy, a similar number of—
or even more— U.S. jobs will likely be threatened if piracy continues
at the present level.
To battle piracy and to protect themselves, the copyright industries have
deployed a lot of battle strategies, including lobbying, lawsuits, and the
use of copyright protection technologies. So far, the industries have been
winning. Among their trophies include the enactment of the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act, which imposes civil and criminal liability for the circumvention
of copy-protection technologies, Vivendi-Universal's purchase of MP3.com,
the movie studios' victory in litigation over DeCSS, a software tool that
allows the copying of encrypted DVDs, the bankruptcy of Napster (and its
earlier acquisition by Bertelsmann), and the Supreme Court's rejection of
the quid pro quo theory in Eldred v. Ashcroft, the recent Supreme
Court case on copyright term extension.
Unfortunately, these victories came at a huge price to consumers and were often at odds with the public interest. Consider, for example, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The statute requires Internet service providers to remove any hosted content that allegedly infringes upon the work of a copyright holder, regardless of whether the reproduction of materials is permissible under existing copyright law. The law also prohibits the circumvention of anticopying devices and rights-management systems, thus preventing people from engaging in actions that traditionally have been considered legally permissible.
Equally problematic are the proposals for database protection legislation. As commentators pointed out, database protection would confer far broader and stronger exclusive rights on database content than is necessary to provide the needed incentives for database producers. Such protection also would raise serious questions concerning the protection of free speech and media.
This presentation focuses on the recent developments in both the United States and the international community and explores the impact of these developments on news and digital broadcasting. It also raises questions concerning the global digital divide, self-censorship by private corporations, and increasing concentration of media organizations.
|