Author Archives: Jason Alley

Patents

There seem to be three categories of intellectual property, as far as the law is concerned. Copyright is a law of authorship, trademark concerns commercial ventures, and patent law protects inventions. I have already blogged a lot about copyright, and once about trademarks, so let’s give patents a share. The Constitution requires that the government promote the sciences by a way we have since adopted as patents. In a similar way, copyright also encourages creation of the arts by offering many benefits to being a creator.  Unlike copyrights, however, a patent cannot logically forbid anyone from using a copy of the patented product. Inventions are meant to be used by the public, or by a manufacturer depending on what the invention is. Patents are perhaps less restricting elements than copyright; it protects royalties and such for the inventor, but it does little to limit the exchange of the invention. After all, even more than copyrighted materials or trademarks, patented inventions are meant to be used for the public good.

 

Beyond the Individual: Copyright Works for Us All

More and more, I am getting the sense that copyright is not just some old prude’s law, its sole purpose hording texts for no greater good than money. Instead, copyright policy is working for the proliferation of culture, although some would see it as a stagnating force. According to one critic, lawmakers write copyright policy to encourage the creation of cultural works. Giving certain rights to the creators give them an incentive to create. However, should these laws become too protective, they will make censors out of creators. Vaidhyanathan in his epilogue to Copyrights and Copywrongs admits that cultural production flourishes on its previous productions; should creators censor their own work in other media, they run the risk of impeding the artistic proliferation of newer artists.

Royalties and Copyright

At my internship this past summer, I got an interesting inside look at the publishing world.  Someone in the office made a joke that the company ran entirely on the royalties it made off of one extremely popular piece.  When I inquired into this, I learned that in the music business, royalties must be paid (to the artist/composer/publisher/recording company, etc.) every time a song (or part of a song) is used in a commercial setting.  This included commercials, web advertisements, soundtracks, public performances – you name it.   This idea was supported by Goldstein’s comment that “copyright is about money” (Goldstein 4).  Goldstein also discusses the concept of royalties when he mentions compulsory licenses, which legally force artists who cover another artist’s song to pay $0.08 for each recording of the cover (Goldstein 15).

This article offers an example of a company, Kobalt Music Group, that focuses on delivering royalty payments to artists.  Kobalt acknowledges that the digital age has made tracking the royalties due to artists more difficult, but also understands that royalties are a large portion of artists’ revenue.

More on Plagiarism

While researching for my previous blog post, I found this 2010 article from the New York Times.  I felt that it needed its own post, as it deals with plagiarism in a slightly different way.  This article focuses on the role of technology in regards to plagiarism.  The author examines plagiarism in college and how digital media is blurring rules of plagiarism, as more and more students fail to cite their sources from neglect and ignorance.  Students are also more often directly copying from websites and other digital sources, as the internet has made this even easier, with a simply “copy” and “paste” command.  The author writes that the internet is changing how students “understand the concept of authorship and the singularity of any text or image.”  The author includes shocking statistics, such as one that states that “the number [of students] believed that copying from the Web constitutes “serious cheating” is declining — to 29 percent.”

It’s a pretty interesting article.  This relates directly not only to this class, but to our lives as college students, as we continue our undergraduate educations and technology continues to play a larger role in this education.

Plagiarism in Colleges and Universities

In Copyright’s Highway, Goldstein briefly touches upon a concept that is brought up so often on college and university campuses: plagiarism.  Goldstein writes, “True plagiarism is an ethical, not a legal offense and is enforceable by academic authorities, not courts” (Goldstein 8).  Lafayette has a strict policy against plagiarism and is found in the Student Handbook, the Faculty Advising Handbook, and on the website of the Dean of the College, to name a few sources.  I was shocked to discover that this concept, which I had for so long believed to be illegal, was not in fact supported by any court, but rather only upheld by academia.

What do you think? Should plagiarism be illegal, or is the upholding of rules against plagiarism by colleges and universities unnecessary, as it is technically considered legal in the United States?

Copyright, Parodies, and Guns

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/shirt+tempest+tests+copyright/8016293/story.html

http://metronews.ca/news/vancouver/539930/surrey-up-in-arms-over-the-future-dies-here-spoof-hoodies/

Today in class we discussed the place of parodies within copyright law. Similar discussions are also being had in Surrey, Vancouver. Recently, a local resident and entrepreneur started to sell clothing that read, “Surrey, the future dies here.” The city’s actual motto is, “Surrey, the future lives here.” The gun logo resembles the shape of the city’s skyline in the actual logo. In America, parodies are given more liberty to copy original works. Canada, however, only recently added parodies to its list of what is protected under copyright law. If the Canadian judicial system uses precedent like the American judicial system does, a future lawsuit could begin to clarify the freedom that parodies to mock work in Canada. That would be pretty important, eh?

Kindles

As someone who likes to hold a book and flip the pages as I read, I was not sure if the Kindle e-reader experience would be enjoyable. I initially struggled to use the buttons correctly–skipping to the next chapter rather than turning to the next page. It was very light so holding it felt weird. Like most users who are new to a certain technology, I felt slightly uncomfortable using the tablet. I wanted the paper book back.

I wanted the paper book back, however, until I was in class today. During the discussion about how Goldstein described Justice Holmes, I was able to type “Holmes” into the Kindle search box. I selected The Copyright Highway and instantly got 15 excerpts. One of the excerpts seemed to fit the discussion at hand, too. Had I only had the paper copy of the book, however, I would have had to go to the index, find the page numbers where Holmes was listed, read the pages, and find the passages. While this search process has value (I think…?), the ability to get instant excerpts was very helpful in class today.

In conclusion, while I enjoy reading from paper books outside of class, having a Kindle during class discussions would be great.

“In Defense of the Liberal Arts”

Last week, I submitted my essay that analyzed how the Copyright Act of 1710 and Age of Enlightenment gave authors extrinsic incentives to publish their works. Society ultimately benefits from the discourse that their literature inspires.

After watching this TEDxWhitehorse talk today, I realized that I undervalued the power of literature. In the essay, I touched on how authors could critique political and religious institutions or comment on the flaws in society. Literature, however, is more powerful than just critiques. Rather, we learn about ourselves by identifying with characters.

Judah Pollack, the speaker in the video, describes how he works with soldiers who return home from war. Oftentimes, they feel misunderstood. Ulysses in The Odyssey becomes a relatable character who helps them recover. Another classic, Candide, is still important to readers because “we still recognize ourselves in the mirror of [Voltaire’s] characters and their concerns, as if we would not be surprised to encounter Candide or Cunegonde on the streets of Manhattan today” (Wright).

I want to end with the following quote from Pollack’s presentation because I think it sums up everything well and is thought provoking.

“Pirates used to plunder gold and now they steal stories. Stories are actually more valuable than gold…Stories are the swords we use to slay our dragons. Narrative is the tool we use to understand ourselves and the world. If you don’t share your story with someone, you can never truly be seen. If you don’t share your scars with someone, you can never truly be known.”

Another video series where Pollack incorporates ideas about copyright and literature into everyday life. Video 1 Video 2 Video 3 I particularly like his analysis using Voltaire and Candide: “In many ways, Voltaire gave us the answer about how to mature out of childhood.”

Blog Prompt: Week 6

I just came across this article by the New York Times about a lawsuit challenging Conan Doyle copyrights. I thought this article was interesting, because it is the opposite of what we have been discussing.  Rather than fighting for copyright, this article fights against one. The name Arthur Conan Doyle may sound familiar, and that is because he was the author of the beloved Sherlock Holmes.  Sherlock Holmes has become a cultural phenomenon, with in more recent years, multiple movies and television series starring the character, coming about. A few weeks ago, a civil complaint was filed claiming “many licensing fees paid to the Arthur Conan Doyle estate have been unnecessary, since the main characters and elements of their story derived from materials published before Jan. 1, 1923, are no longer covered by United States copyright law.”  The complaint also claims that the estate, a business entity in England, sent a letter to a publisher saying it would prevent the selling of “In the Company of Sherlock Holmes” if a licensing fee is not paid.  Through the complaint, the court has been asked to “make a declaratory judgment establishing that the basic ‘Sherlock Holmes story elements’ are in the public domain.” The complaint does not deny the fact that the estate is the “sole and exclusive owner” of the material that remains under copyright.  The man who filed the complaint believes that he shouldn’t be subjected to copyright laws because he didn’t draw on any material from the stories still under copyright.  If the man who filed the complaint is telling the truth, which I must believe he is, then I would have to agree with him.  This man shouldn’t be subjected to copyright laws if the works he is drawing from are already in the public domain.

Lab Post

For my post i watched The Alphabet Part 4. This sections intrigued me because it dealt with the advent of the fountain pen. Our fountain pens have made had a profound effect on how i view the written word. The 30 minute segment ends with a modern view of the scribe, now known as a Calligrapher; who will carry on the torch into the future. However, it is said that Calligraphy is seemingly a dying breed, I have only met a handful of people who knew how to write using it. All is not lost however, if our last book viewing has taught me anything, it is that there is still an appreciation for hand written words.