File Sharing or Music Piracy? Legal and Ethical Issues of Downloading Music Illegally Originally presented by Charles Elftmann: May 2, 2006 Copyright & the Internet Internet content falls into 3 Categories : Copyrighted materials Content that infringes someone else’s copyright
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Legal and Ethical Issues of Downloading Music Illegally
by Charles Elftmann:
May 2, 2006
Internet content falls into
Posting or copying unauthorized sound files infringes someone else’s copyright
A good summary and discussion of the pro’s and con’s of illegally downloading music can be found at:
New Scientist (13:02 20 July 2001)
MP3 TECHNOLOGY + NAPSTER Software + BROADBAND INTERNET EXPLOSION =
DRAMATIC GROWTH IN ILLEGAL FILE SHARING
Concise legal history of music copyright:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries”
Insure the Freedom to innovate
Creative work to the public domainCOPYRIGHT as a balancing act
Music protected against unauthorized public performance.
“Respect fair use of copyrighted material and intellectual property. . . . Note that unauthorized duplication or transmission of copyrighted or other proprietary content could subject you to criminal prosecution as well as personal liability in a civil suit.”
“To minimize demands on Alverno’s technology resources and maximize the availability of those resources, you are expected to refrain from activities that generate excessive network traffic. These include but are not limited to:
Morpheus, Kazaa and BearShare
LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASE
…in the case of MGM vs. Grokster & Streamcast (June 27, 2005)
Grokster softwaremarketed as an infringement tool!
>>Neither company used filtering tools or other mechanisms to diminish the infringing activity.<<
>>StreamCast and Grokster make money by selling advertising space, by directing ads to the screens of computers employing their software. . . .the commercial sense of their enterprise turns on high-volume use, which the record shows is infringing.<< --Ernest Miller
Can no longer serve as a safe harbor for businesses based on copyright infringement
Breyer sees a future for non-infringing uses of peer-to-peer software and does not want to see the software outlawed. Only two of his colleagues shared his point of view.
minimum of $750 per song
…up to $150,000 per song
--Phil Galdston quoted in InternetPiracy (2005 Greenhaven Press)
Oberholzer-Gee, F; Strumpf, K. (2005) The effect of file sharing on record sales: an empirical analysis.
Billboard 116.16 (April 17, 2004)
“Legal download services … require a credit card and most teenagers don't have one of these.”
<<The real gripe for the record companies is not these fictional ‘lost sales’.<<
>>What’s keeping them up at night is the realization that musicians don’t need record companies anymore. . . .
Sue the P2P Networks or Software distributors: NAPSTER, GROKSTER, STEAMCAST, etc.
As of April 2006 the RIAA has filed 18,000 lawsuits against individual file sharers
“The RIAA has struck again, this time suing a family that has no computer and no internet connection. The federal lawsuit was filed in Rome, Georgia against a family in Rockmart, GA.” (ZDNet)
>>You will never win your market by suing your customers.<<
>>Perhaps the greatest casualty in the war on piracy has been the public’s perception of the music industry.<<
Some music pirates have created private virtual networks
Often 10 or fewer people trade MP3 files Friend to Friend
musicunited.org/For more information trywww.digitalmusicnews.comor…